Attached is a patch to escape the descriptions in log entries. It's pretty much self-contained, and I think qualifies as a Righteous Patch. B-)
~ESP
On Nov 27, 2003, at 11:20, Evan Prodromou wrote:
Attached is a patch to escape the descriptions in log entries. It's pretty much self-contained, and I think qualifies as a Righteous Patch. B-)
Unfortunately this breaks the links in the upload and protection logs, where we do want live wikitext.
It may be better to move the wfEscapeWikiText() out to the function that decides what to put in the deletion log; as the upload log uses a wiki version for inside the log and a plaintext version for the comment field, the deletion log should be able to make the same distinction of what it wants where.
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
On Nov 27, 2003, at 11:54, Brion Vibber wrote:
On Nov 27, 2003, at 11:20, Evan Prodromou wrote:
Attached is a patch to escape the descriptions in log entries. It's pretty much self-contained, and I think qualifies as a Righteous Patch. B-)
Unfortunately this breaks the links in the upload and protection logs, where we do want live wikitext.
...but we only want it in the action, not the comment, so it seems sufficient to escape the comment. Modified patch attached.
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
"EP" == Evan Prodromou evan@wikitravel.org writes:
EP> Attached is a patch to escape the descriptions in log EP> entries. It's pretty much self-contained, and I think EP> qualifies as a Righteous Patch. B-)
Well, I was wrong, as Brion pointed out: links in the $action param were getting escaped. I went through and did all the escaping at the caller end, per his suggestion, but it was tedious, and I had to do the combining of the two args to addEntry ($action and $comment) manually in each space, too. It was a hassle, so I just went ahead and changed the contract of addEntry(). Now, the $action param is left alone, so it can contain wiki text, but the $comment param is escaped. It's used unescaped for the change comment.
Attached is a patch. I'll be less cocky this time around.
"EP" == Evan Prodromou evan@wikitravel.org writes:
EP> Attached is a patch to escape the descriptions in log EP> entries. It's pretty much self-contained, and I think EP> qualifies as a Righteous Patch. B-)
Well, I was wrong, as Brion pointed out: links in the $action param were getting escaped. I went through and did all the escaping at the caller end, per his suggestion, but it was tedious, and I had to do the combining of the two args to addEntry ($action and $comment) manually in each space, too. It was a hassle, so I just went ahead and changed the contract of addEntry(). Now, the $action param is left alone, so it can contain wiki text, but the $comment param is escaped. It's used unescaped for the change comment.
Attached is a patch. I'll be less cocky this time around.
~ESP
On Nov 27, 2003, at 13:15, Evan Prodromou wrote:
Now, the $action param is left alone, so it can contain wiki text, but the $comment param is escaped. It's used unescaped for the change comment.
Attached is a patch. I'll be less cocky this time around.
If we weren't a bit cocky we'd never get anything done! :)
But we should all try to be more rigorous about testing... and we should have some decent, useable, maintainable, and maintained regression tests (and perhaps unit tests). I don't know if that sounds like fun for anyone to work on...
Anyway, new patch applied, committed, and installed.
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
"BV" == Brion Vibber brion@pobox.com writes:
BV> But we should all try to be more rigorous about testing... and BV> we should have some decent, useable, maintainable, and BV> maintained regression tests (and perhaps unit tests). I don't BV> know if that sounds like fun for anyone to work on...
No, it sounds fun for nobody to work on.
However, I've started a manual test script on the meta-wiki:
http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki_test_script
It should be relatively easy to get up to speed, especially if people who know the software well add to it. Hint hint.
Automated tests are great, but they're difficult for Web applications. The library code in MediaWiki is difficult to isolate and do unit tests for. A manual test script is a step towards some rigor in quality assurance.
~ESP
"BV" == Brion Vibber brion@pobox.com writes:
BV> Anyway, new patch applied, committed, and installed.
Oh, so, just to check with you, there were a couple of other patches I submitted this week. Are they going to go in? Is there anything I can do to make them more attractive?
Also, any chance I can get CVS access?
~ESP
On Nov 28, 2003, at 09:52, Evan Prodromou wrote:
Oh, so, just to check with you, there were a couple of other patches I submitted this week. Are they going to go in? Is there anything I can do to make them more attractive?
Yes, I just haven't got to all of them yet..
Also, any chance I can get CVS access?
You're added to the project, give a holler if you have trouble getting in.
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
"BV" == Brion Vibber brion@pobox.com writes:
Me> Oh, so, just to check with you, there were a couple of other Me> patches I submitted this week. Are they going to go in?
BV> Yes, I just haven't got to all of them yet..
Well, maybe I'll just test out my new CVS access by committing them myself. Sound OK?
~ESP
wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org