Running MW 1.5.6 over PHP 5.0.4 on Windows, we encounter an "Access
Violation" intermittently. We are told that this is fixed in PHP 5.1.2. We
are not able to upgrade MW to a newer version very soon.
Can anyone say whether we will have problems if we upgrade PHP 5.0.4 to
5.1.2 under our existing MW 1.5.6?
TIA.
-- Joshua
-----Original Message-----
From: Fred Bauder [mailto:fredbaud@waterwiki.info]
Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2007 10:30 PM
To: mediawiki-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
In Wikipedia Template:Guideline has as its first statement: class="messagebox"
Where and how are these classes defined?
Fred
We brought over a bunch of pages so we would not be linking to the
wikimedia pages (users :) and in the process something happened to the
Help (and help sub pages)
Where it used to display an 'Icon and Language' then English, it now
shows the Icon and where it used to show English it now shows
English Template:Languages/Lang Template:Languages/Lang
Template:Languages/Lang Template:Languages/Lang Template:Languages/Lang
Template:Languages/Lang Template:Languages/Lang Template:Languages/Lang
Template:Languages/Lang Template:Languages/Lang Template:Languages/Lang
Template:Languages/Lang Template:Languages/Lang Template:Languages/Lang
Template:Languages/Lang Template:Languages/Lang Template:Languages/Lang
Template:Languages/Lang Template:Languages/Lang Template:Languages/Lang
Any idea on how to remove this?
Thanks
DSig
David Tod Sigafoos | SANMAR Corporation
PICK Guy
206-770-5585
davesigafoos(a)sanmar.com
> Deadendpages only gets me the pages that have no internal links TO them.
> I'm trying to find pages that contain no internal links, that is, the page
> only has text on it with no links to other pages in the wiki.
> Really? That list should be on Special:Orphaned pages,
>Special:Dead-end pages should be what you want.
When I try that I get a list of pages with some that do have internal links.
Take a look:
http://www.thecatholicwiki.com/wiki/Special:Deadendpages
If you click on some the pages you will see that those pages do have
internal links (some don't but it's definitely not a list of only pages that
don't have internal links).
______________________
Caitlin Dempsey, Editor
GIS Lounge
http://gislounge.com
editor(a)gislounge.com
>>> Platonides(a)gmail.com> 24/3/2007 00:24 >>
>Without it, almost always two people edit the same page at the same
>time, the second one get an 'edit conflict'. With it, it automatically
>merges most of them without annoying the user.
>
>Un saludo
The problem seems to be that we frequently are out of the "almost always" :-)
What is the behaviour must we expect when this happens? As far as we see here, once the "second" user hits the Save button, it is redirected to a kind of "difference between revisions" showing the differences between the current version and the "in troubles" page.
Please, how must we proceed? By saving the wiki markup in, for instance, a notepad file, login out (if anonymous edition is disable as it is here, waiting until the page is available and copy-pasting then what we consider the new markup? I think this is a bit dangerous: I don't know if more changes have been introduced since I copied the page contents.
Any advice will be welcome! Thank you in advance,
Saludos!
Ricardo
--
Ricardo Rodríguez
Your XEN ICT Team
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Your EPEC ICT Team - Ricardo Rodríguez [mailto:webmaster@xen.net]
>Sent: Saturday, March 24, 2007 06:49 AM
>To: mediawiki-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>Subject: Re: [Mediawiki-l] simultaneous edition
>
>
>>>> Platonides(a)gmail.com> 24/3/2007 00:24 >>
>
>>Without it, almost always two people edit the same page at the same
>>time, the second one get an 'edit conflict'. With it, it automatically
>>merges most of them without annoying the user.
>>
>>Un saludo
>
>The problem seems to be that we frequently are out of the "almost always" :-)
>
>What is the behaviour must we expect when this happens? As far as we see here, once the "second" user hits the Save button, it is redirected to a kind of "difference between revisions" showing the differences between the current version and the "in troubles" page.
>
>Please, how must we proceed? By saving the wiki markup in, for instance, a notepad file, login out (if anonymous edition is disable as it is here, waiting until the page is available and copy-pasting then what we consider the new markup? I think this is a bit dangerous: I don't know if more changes have been introduced since I copied the page contents.
>
>Any advice will be welcome! Thank you in advance,
>
>Saludos!
>
>Ricardo
I'm not sure if your question is about coding or editing. When an edit conflict happens you need to hit your back button and save the new content, which, hopefully, is in a compact section. Then you need to take a look at the other edit, by checking the edit history. Not a good idea to simply replace it. If both edits are spread all over the page, all you can do is start over. So a good habit not to make extensive edits over the entire text of a popular article, especially if you are taking a lot of time. I can't imagine a coding solution for conflicts between two edits when both make numerous changes spread over the whole article.
Fred
---
Ricardo Rodríguez
Your XEN ICT Team
>>> Tim Starling<tstarling(a)wikimedia.org> 22/03/07 6:18 >>>
>
>Make sure you have diff3 installed and correctly set up. >$wgDiff3 should
>be set to the path to the binary. This is necessary for >MediaWiki to merge
>changes between conflicting edits.
>
>-- Tim Starling
Thanks, Tim.
I've checked LocalSettings.php and there the concerned variable is set up as...
$wgDiff3 = "/usr/bin/diff3";
diff3 is in the correct placed in /usr/bin/diff3.
Please, Tim, how could I test the correct functioning of the utility? What must I expect of the utility integrated in MediaWiki? Thanks.
All the best,
Ricardo