}
if ($config{rcs}) {
- if (exists $IkiWiki::hooks{rcs}) {
+ if (exists $hooks{rcs}) {
error(gettext("cannot use multiple rcs plugins"));
}
loadplugin($config{rcs});
}
- if (! exists $IkiWiki::hooks{rcs}) {
+ if (! exists $hooks{rcs}) {
loadplugin("norcs");
}
else {
return IkiWiki::SuccessReason->new("$page links to page $p matching $link")
if match_glob($p, $link, %params);
- $p=~s/^\///;
+ my ($p_rel)=$p=~/^\/?(.*)/;
$link=~s/^\///;
- return IkiWiki::SuccessReason->new("$page links to page $p matching $link")
- if match_glob($p, $link, %params);
+ return IkiWiki::SuccessReason->new("$page links to page $p_rel matching $link")
+ if match_glob($p_rel, $link, %params);
}
}
return IkiWiki::FailReason->new("$page does not link to $link");
to the body tag.
* Support RPC::XML 0.69's incompatable object instantiation method.
* mirrorlist: Display nothing if list is empty.
+ * Fix a bug that could lead to duplicate links being recorded
+ for tags.
-- Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org> Sun, 27 Sep 2009 17:40:03 -0400
> If you can get to the problem after rebuilding with the current ikiwiki,
> and then refreshing a few times, I guess I will need a copy of the wiki
> source and the `.ikiwiki` directory to reproduce this. --[[Joey]]
+
+>> Hi Joey, thanks for your response. I've reproduced it post rebuild and after having ran ikiwiki-transition and many refreshes (both resulting from content changes and otherwise) unfortunately, with ikiwiki 3.14159265 (different machine to above report, though). I will contact you privately to provide a git URL and a copy of my .ikiwiki. -- [[Jon]]
+
+>>> Found the bug that was causing duplicates to get in, and fixed it.
+>>> [[done]] --[[Joey]]
recorded. If we make destpage mandatory to fix this, goofing up will lead to
this bug coming back. Ugh.
-Another approach to fix it could be to say that anything that causes a
+----
+
+## rebuild = change approach
+
+[[!template id=gitbranch branch=origin/transitive-dependencies author="[[joey]]"]]
+
+Another approach to fix it is to say that anything that causes a
rebuild of B is treated as a change of B. Then when C is changed, B is
-rebuilt due to dependencies, and in turn this means A is rebuild because B
+rebuilt due to dependencies, and in turn this means A is rebuilt because B
"changed".
This is essentially what is done with wikilinks now, and why, if a sidebar
building contact.mdwn, which depends on sidebar
...
-The only downside I can see with this approach is that it involves more work.
-Does the dep resolver have to keep looping until no new pages are rebuilt?
-Seems worth a try to implement this approach.
+Downsides here:
+
+* Means a minimum of 2x as much time spent resolving dependencies,
+ at least in my simple implementation, which re-runs the dependency
+ resolution loop until no new pages are rebuilt.
+ (I added an optimisation that gets it down to 1.5X as much work on
+ average, still 2x as much worst case.)
+* Causes extra work for some transitive dependencies that we don't
+ actually care about. For example, changing index causes
+ plugins/brokenlinks to update in the first pass; if there's a second
+ pass, plugins/map is then updated, because it depends on plugins/brokenlinks.
+ (Of course, this is just a special case of the issue that a real
+ modification to plugins/brokenlinks causes an unnecessary update of plugins/map,
+ because we have [[only_one_kind_of_dependency|todo/dependency_types]].)
--[[Joey]]
\[[!pagestats style="table"]]
-The optional `among` parameter limits counting to pages that match a
+The optional `among` parameter limits display to pages that match a
[[ikiwiki/PageSpec]]. For instance, to display a cloud of tags used on blog
entries, you could use:
The `pagetemplate` directive is supplied by the [[!iki plugins/pagetemplate desc=pagetemplate]] plugin.
-This directive allows a page to be created using a different wikitemplates.
+This directive allows a page to be displayed using a different template than
+the default `page.tmpl` template.
+
The page text is inserted into the template, so the template controls the
overall look and feel of the wiki page. This is in contrast to the
[[ikiwiki/directive/template]] directive, which allows inserting templates
[[!tag type/chrome]]
This plugin provides the [[ikiwiki/directive/pagetemplate]]
-[[ikiwiki/directive]], which allows a page to be created using a different
-[[template|wikitemplates]].
+[[ikiwiki/directive]], which allows a page to be displayed
+using a different [[template|wikitemplates]] than the default.
This plugin can only use templates that are already installed in
`/usr/share/ikiwiki/templates` (or wherever ikiwiki is configured to look for
>>> Well, seems you want to match the indent at the start of the line containing
>>> the directive, even if the directive does not start the line. That would
>>> be quite hard to make a regexp do, though. --[[Joey]]
+>>
+>> I wasted a long time getting the simpler `indent($1, handle->($2,$,4))` to
+>> work (remember, I don't know perl at all). Somehow `$1` does not arrive, I
+>> made a simple testcase that worked, and I conclude something inside $handle
+>> results in the value of $1 not arriving as it should!
+>>
+>> Anyway, instead a very simple incremental patch is in [pproc-indent][ppi]
+>> where the indentation regex is `(^[ \t]+|)` instead, which seems to work
+>> very well (and the regex is multiline now as well). I'm happy to rebase the
+>> changes if you want or you can just squash the four patches 1+3 => 1+1
+>> -- [[ulrik]]
[ppi]: http://github.com/engla/ikiwiki/commits/pproc-indent
--- /dev/null
+At the moment, IkiWiki allows you to set the template for individual pages using the [[plugins/pagetemplate]] directive/plugin, but not for whole sections of the wiki.
+
+I've written a new plugin, sectiontemplate, available in the `page_tmpl` branch of my git repository that allows setting the template by pagespec in the config file.
+
+-- [[Will]]
+
+> This is an excellent idea and looks ready for merging.
+> Before I do though, would it perhaps make sense to merge
+> this in with the pagetemplate plugin? They do such a similar thing,
+> and unless letting users control the template by editing a page is not
+> wanted, I can't see any reason not to combine them. --[[Joey]]
+
+> One other idea is moving the pagespec from setup file to a directive.
+> The edittemplate plugin does that, and it might be nice
+> to be consistent with that. To implement it, you'd have to
+> make the scan hook store the template pagespecs in `%pagestate`,
+> so a bit more complicated. --[[Joey]]
+
+>> I started with the pagetemplate plugin, which is why they're so similar. I guess they could be combined.
+>> I had a brief think about having the specs and templates defined in a directive rather than the config file, but it got tricky.
+>> How do you know what needs to be rebuilt when? There is probably a solution, maybe even an obvious one, but I thought that getting something done was more important than polishing it.
+>> In the worst case, admins can always use the web interface to change the setup :).
+
+>> I wanted this to put comments on my new blog, and was more interested in that goal than this subgoal. I've moved most of my web pages to IkiWiki and there is only one small part that is the blog.
+>> I wanted to use [[Disqus comments|tips/Adding_Disqus_to_your_wiki/]], but only on the blog pages. (I'm using Disqus rather than IkiWiki comments because I don't want to have to deal with spam, security, etc. I'll happily just let someone else host the comments.) -- [[Will]]
+
+>>> Yes, handing the rebuild is a good reason not to use directives for
+>>> this.
+>>>
+>>> I do still think combining this with pagetemplate would be good.
+>>> --[[Joey]]
--- /dev/null
+Ikiwiki currently only has one type of dependency between pages
+(plus wikilinks special cased in on the side). This has resulted in various
+problems, and it's seemed for a long time to me that ikiwiki needs to get
+smarter about what types of dependencies are supported.
+
+### unnecessary work
+
+The current single dependency type causes the depending page to be rebuilt
+whenever a matching dependency is added, removed, or *modified*. But a
+great many things don't care about the modification case, and often cause
+unnecessary page rebuilds:
+
+* map only cares if the pages are added or removed. Content change does
+ not matter (unless show=title is used).
+* brokenlinks, orphans, pagecount, ditto (generally)
+* inline in archive mode cares about page title, author changing, but
+ not content. (Ditto for meta with show=title.)
+* Causes extra work when solving the [[bugs/transitive_dependencies]]
+ problem.
+
+### two types of dependencies needed for [[tracking_bugs_with_dependencies]]
+
+>> it seems that there are two types of dependency, and ikiwiki
+>> currently only handles one of them. The first type is "Rebuild this
+>> page when any of these other pages changes" - ikiwiki handles this.
+>> The second type is "rebuild this page when set of pages referred to by
+>> this pagespec changes" - ikiwiki doesn't seem to handle this. I
+>> suspect that named pagespecs would make that second type of dependency
+>> more important. I'll try to come up with a good example. -- [[Will]]
+
+>>> Hrm, I was going to build an example of this with backlinks, but it
+>>> looks like that is handled as a special case at the moment (line 458 of
+>>> render.pm). I'll see if I can breapk
+>>> things another way. Fixing this properly would allow removal of that special case. -- [[Will]]
+
+>>>> I can't quite understand the distinction you're trying to draw
+>>>> between the two types of dependencies. Backlinks are a very special
+>>>> case though and I'll be suprised if they fit well into pagespecs.
+>>>> --[[Joey]]
+
+>>>>> The issue is that the existential pagespec matching allows you to build things that have similar
+>>>>> problems to backlinks.
+>>>>> e.g. the following inline:
+
+ \[[!inline pages="define(~done, link(done)) and link(~done)" archive=yes]]
+
+>>>>> includes any page that links to a page that links to done. Now imagine I add a new link to 'done' on
+>>>>> some random page somewhere - a page which some other page links to which didn't previously get included - the set of pages accepted by the pagespec, and hence the set of
+>>>>> pages inlined, will change. But, there is no dependency anywhere on the page that I altered, so
+>>>>> ikiwiki will not rebuild the page with the inline in it. What is happening is that the page that I altered affects
+>>>>> the set of pages matched by the pagespec without itself being matched by the pagespec, and hence included in the dependency list.
+
+>>>>> To make this work well, I think you need to recognise two types of dependencies for each page (and no
+>>>>> special cases for particular types of links, eg backlinks). The first type of dependency says, "The content of
+>>>>> this page depends upon the content of these other pages". The `add_depends()` in the shortcuts
+>>>>> plugin is of this form: any time the shortcuts page is edited, any page with a shortcut on it
+>>>>> is rebuilt. The inline plugin also needs to add dependencies of this form to detect when the inlined
+>>>>> content changes. By contrast, the map plugin does not need a dependency of this form, because it
+>>>>> doesn't actually care about the content of any pages, just which pages it needs to include (which we'll handle next).
+
+>>>>> The second type of dependency says, "The content of this page depends upon the exact set of pages matched
+>>>>> by this pagespec". The first type of dependency was about the content of some pages, the second type is about
+>>>>> which pages get matched by a pagespec. This is the type of dependency tracking that the map plugin needs.
+>>>>> If the set of pages matched by map pagespec changes, then the page with the map on it needs to be rebuilt to show a different list of pages.
+>>>>> Inline needs this type of dependency as well as the previous type - This type handles a change in which pages
+>>>>> are inlined, the previous type handles a change in the content of any of those pages. Shortcut does not need this type of
+>>>>> dependency. Most of the places that use `add_depends()` seem to need this type of dependency rather than the first type.
+
+>>>>>> Note that inline and map currently achieve the second type of dependency by
+>>>>>> explicitly calling `add_depends` for each page the displayed.
+>>>>>> If any of those pages are removed, the regular pagespec would not
+>>>>>> match them -- since they're gone. However, the explicit dependency
+>>>>>> on them does cause them to match. It's an ugly corner I'd like to
+>>>>>> get rid of. --[[Joey]]
+
+>>>>> Implementation Details: The first type of dependency can be handled very similarly to the current
+>>>>> dependency system. You just need to keep a list of pages that the content depends upon. You could
+>>>>> keep that list as a pagespec, but if you do this you might want to check that the pagespec doesn't change,
+>>>>> possibly by adding a dependency of the second type along with the dependency of the first type.
+
+>>>>>> An example of the current system not tracking enough data is
+>>>>>> described in [[bugs/transitive_dependencies]].
+>>>>>> --[[Joey]]
+
+>>>>> The second type of dependency is a little more tricky. For each page, we'd need a list of pagespecs that
+>>>>> the page depended on, and for each pagespec you'd want to store the list of pages that currently match it.
+>>>>> On refresh, you'd need to check each pagespec to see if the set of pages that match it has changed, and if
+>>>>> that set has changed, then rebuild the dependent page(s). Oh, and for this second type of dependency, I
+>>>>> don't think you can merge pagespecs. If I wanted to know if either "\*" or "link(done)" changes, then just checking
+>>>>> to see if the set of pages matched by "\* or link(done)" changes doesn't work.
+
+>>>>> The current system works because even though you usually want dependencies of the second type, the set of pages
+>>>>> referred to by a pagespec can only change if one of those pages itself changes. i.e. A dependency check of the
+>>>>> first type will catch a dependency change of the second type with current pagespecs.
+>>>>> This doesn't work with backlinks, and it doesn't work with existential matching. Backlinks are currently special-cased. I don't know
+>>>>> how to special-case existential matching - I suspect you're better off just getting the dependency tracking right.
+
+>>>>> I also tried to come up with other possible solutions: e.g. can we find the dependencies for a pagespec? That
+>>>>> would be the set of pages where a change on one of those pages could lead to a change in the set of pages matched by the pagespec.
+>>>>> For old-style pagespecs without backlinks, the dependency set for a pagespec is the same as the set of pages the pagespec matches.
+>>>>> Unfortunately, with existential matching, the set of pages that each
+>>>>> pagespec depends upon can quickly become "*", which is not very useful. -- [[Will]]
+
+### proposal
+
+I propose the following. --[[Joey]]
+
+* Add a second type of dependency, call it an "contentless dependency".
+* `add_depends` defaults to adding a regular ("full") dependency, as
+ before. (So nothing breaks.)
+* `add_depends($page, $spec, content => 0)` adds an contentless dependency.
+* `refresh` only looks at added/removed pages when resolving contentless
+ dependencies.
+
+This seems straightforwardly doable. I'd like [[Will]]'s feedback on it, if
+possible. The type types of dependencies I am proposing are not identical
+to the two types he talks about above, but I hope are close enough that
+they can be used.
+
+This doesn't deal with the stuff that only depend on the metadata of a
+page, as collected in the scan pass, changing. But it does leave a window
+open for adding such a dependency type later.
+
+----
+
+I implemented the above in a branch.
+[[!template id=gitbranch branch=origin/dependency-types author="[[joey]]"]]
+
+Then I found some problems:
+
+* Something simple like pagecount, that seems like it could use a
+ contentless dependency, can have a pagespec that uses metadata, like
+ `author()` or `copyright()`.
+* pagestats, orphans and brokenlinks cannot use contentless dependencies
+ because they need to update when links change.
+
+Now I'm thinking about having a contentless dependency look at page
+metadata, and fire if the metadata changes. And it seems links should
+either be included in that, or there should be a way to make a dependency
+that fires when a page's links change. (And what about backlinks?)
+
+It's easy to see when a page's links change, since there is `%oldlinks`.
+To see when metadata is changed is harder, since it's stored in the
+pagestate by the meta plugin.
+
+Quick alternative: Make add_depends look at the pagespec. Ie, if it
+is a simple page name, or a glob, we know a contentless dependency
+can be valid. If's more complex, convert the dependency from
+contentless to full.
+
+There is a lot to dislike about this method. Its parsing of the
+pagespec, as currently implemented, does not let plugins add new types of
+pagespecs that are contentless. Its pagespec parsing is also subject to
+false negatives (though these should be somewhat rare, and no false
+positives). Still, it does work, and it makes things like simple maps and
+pagecounts much more efficient.
--- /dev/null
+I would like some pages (identified by pagespec) to not expand ikiwiki directives (wikilinks, or \[[!, or both, or perhaps either).
+
+I will tag this [[wishlist]]. It's something I might try myself. It's part of my thinking about how to handle [[comments]], as I'm still ruminating on alternatives to [[smcv]]'s approach. (with the greatest of respect to smcv!) (Perhaps my attempt will try to factor out the no-directives-allowed logic from the comments plugin).
+
+ -- [[Jon]]
> --[[Joey]]
>> There is one issue that I've been thinking about that I haven't raised anywhere (or checked myself), and that is how this all interacts with page dependencies.
->> Firstly, I'm not sure anymore that the `pagespec_merge` function will continue to work in all cases.
+>>
+>>> I've moved the discussion of that to [[dependency_types]]. --[[Joey]]
+>>
+>> I'm not sure anymore that the `pagespec_merge` function will continue to work in all cases.
>>> The problem I can see there is that if two pagespecs
>>> get merged and both use `~foo` but define it differently,
>>> My [[remove-pagespec-merge|should_optimise_pagespecs]] branch has now
>>> solved all this by deleting the offending function :-) --[[smcv]]
->> Secondly, it seems that there are two types of dependency, and ikiwiki
->> currently only handles one of them. The first type is "Rebuild this
->> page when any of these other pages changes" - ikiwiki handles this.
->> The second type is "rebuild this page when set of pages referred to by
->> this pagespec changes" - ikiwiki doesn't seem to handle this. I
->> suspect that named pagespecs would make that second type of dependency
->> more important. I'll try to come up with a good example. -- [[Will]]
-
->>> Hrm, I was going to build an example of this with backlinks, but it
->>> looks like that is handled as a special case at the moment (line 458 of
->>> render.pm). I'll see if I can breapk
->>> things another way. Fixing this properly would allow removal of that special case. -- [[Will]]
-
->>>> I can't quite understand the distinction you're trying to draw
->>>> between the two types of dependencies. Backlinks are a very special
->>>> case though and I'll be suprised if they fit well into pagespecs.
->>>> --[[Joey]]
-
->>>>> The issue is that the existential pagespec matching allows you to build things that have similar
->>>>> problems to backlinks.
->>>>> e.g. the following inline:
-
- \[[!inline pages="define(~done, link(done)) and link(~done)" archive=yes]]
-
->>>>> includes any page that links to a page that links to done. Now imagine I add a new link to 'done' on
->>>>> some random page somewhere - a page which some other page links to which didn't previously get included - the set of pages accepted by the pagespec, and hence the set of
->>>>> pages inlined, will change. But, there is no dependency anywhere on the page that I altered, so
->>>>> ikiwiki will not rebuild the page with the inline in it. What is happening is that the page that I altered affects
->>>>> the set of pages matched by the pagespec without itself being matched by the pagespec, and hence included in the dependency list.
-
->>>>> To make this work well, I think you need to recognise two types of dependencies for each page (and no
->>>>> special cases for particular types of links, eg backlinks). The first type of dependency says, "The content of
->>>>> this page depends upon the content of these other pages". The `add_depends()` in the shortcuts
->>>>> plugin is of this form: any time the shortcuts page is edited, any page with a shortcut on it
->>>>> is rebuilt. The inline plugin also needs to add dependencies of this form to detect when the inlined
->>>>> content changes. By contrast, the map plugin does not need a dependency of this form, because it
->>>>> doesn't actually care about the content of any pages, just which pages it needs to include (which we'll handle next).
-
->>>>> The second type of dependency says, "The content of this page depends upon the exact set of pages matched
->>>>> by this pagespec". The first type of dependency was about the content of some pages, the second type is about
->>>>> which pages get matched by a pagespec. This is the type of dependency tracking that the map plugin needs.
->>>>> If the set of pages matched by map pagespec changes, then the page with the map on it needs to be rebuilt to show a different list of pages.
->>>>> Inline needs this type of dependency as well as the previous type - This type handles a change in which pages
->>>>> are inlined, the previous type handles a change in the content of any of those pages. Shortcut does not need this type of
->>>>> dependency. Most of the places that use `add_depends()` seem to need this type of dependency rather than the first type.
-
->>>>>> Note that inline and map currently achieve the second type of dependency by
->>>>>> explicitly calling `add_depends` for each page the displayed.
->>>>>> If any of those pages are removed, the regular pagespec would not
->>>>>> match them -- since they're gone. However, the explicit dependency
->>>>>> on them does cause them to match. It's an ugly corner I'd like to
->>>>>> get rid of. --[[Joey]]
-
->>>>> Implementation Details: The first type of dependency can be handled very similarly to the current
->>>>> dependency system. You just need to keep a list of pages that the content depends upon. You could
->>>>> keep that list as a pagespec, but if you do this you might want to check that the pagespec doesn't change,
->>>>> possibly by adding a dependency of the second type along with the dependency of the first type.
-
->>>>>> An example of the current system not tracking enough data is
->>>>>> described in [[bugs/transitive_dependencies]].
->>>>>> --[[Joey]]
-
->>>>> The second type of dependency is a little more tricky. For each page, we'd need a list of pagespecs that
->>>>> the page depended on, and for each pagespec you'd want to store the list of pages that currently match it.
->>>>> On refresh, you'd need to check each pagespec to see if the set of pages that match it has changed, and if
->>>>> that set has changed, then rebuild the dependent page(s). Oh, and for this second type of dependency, I
->>>>> don't think you can merge pagespecs. If I wanted to know if either "\*" or "link(done)" changes, then just checking
->>>>> to see if the set of pages matched by "\* or link(done)" changes doesn't work.
-
->>>>> The current system works because even though you usually want dependencies of the second type, the set of pages
->>>>> referred to by a pagespec can only change if one of those pages itself changes. i.e. A dependency check of the
->>>>> first type will catch a dependency change of the second type with current pagespecs.
->>>>> This doesn't work with backlinks, and it doesn't work with existential matching. Backlinks are currently special-cased. I don't know
->>>>> how to special-case existential matching - I suspect you're better off just getting the dependency tracking right.
-
->>>>> I also tried to come up with other possible solutions: e.g. can we find the dependencies for a pagespec? That
->>>>> would be the set of pages where a change on one of those pages could lead to a change in the set of pages matched by the pagespec.
->>>>> For old-style pagespecs without backlinks, the dependency set for a pagespec is the same as the set of pages the pagespec matches.
->>>>> Unfortunately, with existential matching, the set of pages that each
->>>>> pagespec depends upon can quickly become "*", which is not very useful. -- [[Will]]
+
Patch updated to use closures rather than inline generated code for named pagespecs. Also includes some new use of ErrorReason where appropriate. -- [[Will]]
* an alternative approach to [[plugins/comments]] (see
[[todo/more flexible inline postform]] for one piece of the puzzle;
<http://dev.jmtd.net/comments/> for some investigation into making the post
- form more integrated)
+ form more integrated); possibly also [[todo/pagespec to disable ikiwiki directives]]
* a system for [[forum/managing_todo_lists]] (see also
[[todo/interactive todo lists]] and <http://dev.jmtd.net/outliner/> for the
current WIP).
I am currently mostly interested in ikiwiki usability issues:
* [[bugs/the login page is unclear when multiple methods exist]]
+ * [[bugs/backlinks onhover thing can go weird]]
sipb-www / ikiwiki.git / commitdiff
