1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
|
[[!template id=gitbranch branch=GiuseppeBilotta/inlinestuff author="[[GiuseppeBilotta]]"]]
I rearranged my patchset once again, to clearly identify the origin and
motivation of each patch, which is explained in the following.
In my ikiwiki-based website I have the following situation:
* `$config{usedirs}` is 1
* there are a number of subdirectories (A/, B/, C/, etc)
with pages under each of them (A/page1, A/page2, B/page3, etc)
* 'index pages' for each subdirectory: A.mdwn, B.mdwn, C.mdwn;
these are rather barebone, only contain an inline directive for their
respective subpages and become A/index.html, etc
* there is also the main index.mdwn, which inlines A.mdwn, B.mdwn, C.mdwn,
etc (i.e. the top-level index files are also inlined on the homepage)
With the upstream `inline` plugin, the feeds for A, B, C etc are located
in `A/index.atom`, `B/index.atom`, etc; their title is the wiki name and
their main link goes to the wiki homepage rather than to their
respective subdir (e.g. I would expect `A/index.atom` to have a link to
`http://website/A` but it actually points to `http://website/`).
This is due to them being generated from the main index page, and is
fixed by the first patch: ‘inline: base feed urls on included page
name’. As explained in the commit message for the patch itself, this is
a ‘forgotten part’ from a previous page vs destpage fix which has
already been included upstream.
> Applied. --[[Joey]]
>> Thanks.
The second patch, ‘inline: improve feed title and description
management’, aligns feed title and description management by introducing
a `title` option to complement `description`, and by basing the
description on the page description if the entry is missing. If no
description is provided by either the directive parameter or the page
metadata, we use a user-configurable default based on both the page
title and wiki name rather than hard-coding the wiki name as description.
> Reviewing, this seems ok, but I don't like that
> `feed_desc_fmt` is "safe => 0". And I question if that needs
> to be configurable at all. I say, drop that configurable, and
> only use the page meta description (or wikiname for index).
>
> Oh, and could you indent your `elsif` the same as I? --[[Joey]]
>> I hadn't even realized that I was nesting ifs inside else clauses,
>> sorry. I think you're also right about the safety of the key, after
>> all it only gets interpolated with known, safe strings.
>>> I did not mean to imply that I thought it safe. --[[Joey]]
>>>> Sorry for assuming you implied that. I do think it is safe, though
>>>> (I defaulted to not safe just to err on the safe side).
>> The question is what to do for pages that do not have a description
>> (and are not the index). With your proposal, the Atom feed subtitle
>> would turn up empty. We could make it conditional in the default
>> template, or we could have `$desc` default to `$title` if nothing
>> else is provided, but at this point I see no reason to _not_ allow
>> the user to choose a way to build a default description.
>>> RSS requires the `<description>` element be present, it can't
>>> be conditionalized away. But I see no reason to add the complexity
>>> of an option to configure a default value for a field that
>>> few RSS consumers likely even use. That's about 3 levels below useful.
>>> --[[Joey]]
>>>> The way I see it, there are three possibilities for non-index pages
>>>> which have no description meta: (1) we leave the
>>>> description/subtitle in feed blank, per your current proposal here
>>>> (2) we hard-code some string to put there and (3) we make the
>>>> string to put there configurable. Honestly, I think option #1 sucks
>>>> aesthetically and option #2 is conceptually wrong (I'm against
>>>> hard-coding stuff in general), which leaves option #3: however
>>>> rarely used it would be, I still think it'd be better than #2 and
>>>> less unaesthetical than #1.
>>>> I'm also not sure what's ‘complex’ about having such an option:
>>>> it's definitely not going to get much use, but does it hurt to have
>>>> it? I could understand not wasting time putting it in, but since
>>>> the code is written already … (but then again I'm known for being a
>>>> guy who loves options).
The third patch, ‘inline: allow assigning an id to postform/feedlink’,
does just that. I don't currently use it, but it can be particularly
useful in the postform case for example for scriptable management of
multiple postforms in the same page.
> Applied. --[[Joey]]
>> Thanks.
In one of my wiki setups I had a terminating '/' in `$config{url}`. You
mention that it should not be present, but I have not seen this
requirement described anywhere. Rather than restricting the user input,
I propose a patch that prevents double slashes from appearing in links
created by `urlto()` by fixing the routine itself.
> If this is fixed I would rather not put the overhead of fixing it in
> every call to `urlto`. And I'm not sure this is a comprehensive
> fix to every problem a trailing slash in the url could cause. --[[Joey]]
>> Maybe something that sanitizes the config value would be better instead?
>> What is the policy about automatic changing user config?
>>> It's impossible to do for perl-format setup files. --[[Joey]]
>>>> Ok. In that case I think that we should document that it must be
>>>> slash-less. I'll cook up a patch in that sense.
The inline plugin is also updated (in a separate patch) to use `urlto()`
rather than hand-coding the feed urls. You might want to keep this
change even if you discard the urlto patch.
> IIRC, I was missing a proof that this always resulted in identical urls,
> which is necessary to prevent flooding. I need such a proof before I can
> apply that. --[[Joey]]
>> Well, the URL would obviously change if the `$config{url}` ended in
>> slash and the `urlto` patch (or other equivalent) went into effect.
>> Aside from that, if I read the code correctly, the only other extra
>> thing that `urlto` does is to `beautify_url_path` the `"/".$to` part,
>> and the only way this would cause the url to be altered is if the
>> feed name was "index" (which can easily happen) and
>> `$config{htmlext}` was set to something like `.rss` or
>> `.rss.1`.
>> So there is a remote possibility that a different URL would be
>> produced.
|