provides a minimum functionality of what people expect these days. It is very much like the MediaWiki
interface, for better or worse.
Description and Documentation
merely update the Foswiki distribution's MANIFEST file
and add the following line:
during the development of 1.1, the CompareRevisionsAddOn could
be further enhanced; those enhancements should be handled in subsequent RequestProposals
and task items.
-- Contributors: WillNorris
- 27 Apr 2009
It would be better to bring this functionality into the RDiff code, instead of duplicating things and increasing the codebase we have to maintain.
It also seems to me to be important to analyse the actual benefits of the code and to consider what we can do better (as the core has full access to things)
- 28 Apr 2009
I agree with Sven in principle.
But I also know we have a large pile on our table and it is not likely that this feature gets implemted. We already have quite many accepted proposals that have piled up for 1-2 years. And some of them are being worked on. But most are not touched.
Unless someone steps up and starts implementing this I agree that CompareRevisionsAddOn
should be a default extension.
And along with HistoryPlugin
. The two go hand in hand.
If the features get implemented in core then we can remove the plugins again.
- 29 Apr 2009
I agree with Kenneth. -- MichaelTempest
- 01 Jul 2009
Make them default plugins, I installed them on our system around a week ago and this seems to be standard functionality. There wasn't anything additional I had to install as the stuff for dependencies was already available on my installation.
- 01 Jul 2009
Please do ship CompareRevisionsAddOn
as part of the standard distribution. It might need a bit of a cleanup inside.
- 02 Jul 2009
Sven, I have received several encouragements to push this proposal forward to a community vote.
Under the AGREEMENT that this plugin AND History plugin gets integrated into core in 2.0 - can you accept the compromise to include them in 1.1? (I personally also prefer the function in core but for resource and time reasons a work neutral solution for 1.1 is the only feasible way if we want 1.1 in August. I will gladly be part of the implementation in 2.0 core)
The plugins work great as they are. The only improvement I will try and address is how it marks up changed tables. It could be a little better. But the plugins are releasable as they are.
- 02 Jul 2009
As an additional note - as the current maintainer of CompareRevisionsAddOn
I give my permission to change the change policy to FollowReleaseProcess
. This is required for all extensions that become default extensions to protect both our users and the original authors.
Sven, again, given the condition and promise that we merge the feature of CompareRevisionsAddOn
into core in 2.0 - are you OK to lift your concern? That would save the community a vote
- 22 Jul 2009
done, and commited to trunk
presumably Will will be doing some docco work, and adding unit tests.
- 27 Jul 2009