mediawiki-extensions-Discus.../extension.json

211 lines
5.6 KiB
JSON
Raw Normal View History

{
"name": "DiscussionTools",
"license-name": "MIT",
"version": "0.0.0",
"url": "https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:DiscussionTools",
"namemsg": "discussiontools",
"descriptionmsg": "discussiontools-desc",
"manifest_version": 2,
"requires": {
"MediaWiki": ">= 1.34.0",
"extensions": {
"VisualEditor": ">= 0.1.1"
}
},
"MessagesDirs": {
"DiscussionTools": [ "i18n" ]
},
"callback": "DiscussionToolsHooks::onRegistration",
"ResourceFileModulePaths": {
"localBasePath": "modules",
"remoteExtPath": "DiscussionTools/modules"
},
"ResourceModules": {
"ext.discussionTools.parser": {
"packageFiles": [
"parser.js",
"lib/moment-timezone/moment-timezone-with-data-1970-2030.js",
{
"name": "data.json",
"callback": "DiscussionToolsData::getLocalData"
}
],
"dependencies": [
"moment",
"mediawiki.util",
"mediawiki.Uri",
"mediawiki.Title"
]
},
"ext.discussionTools.modifier": {
"packageFiles": [
"modifier.js"
]
},
"ext.discussionTools.controller": {
"packageFiles": [
"controller.js",
{
"name": "config.json",
"config": {
"useVisualEditor": "DiscussionToolsUseVisualEditor"
}
}
],
"dependencies": [
"rangefix",
"ext.discussionTools.parser",
"ext.discussionTools.modifier"
],
"messages": [
"discussiontools-defaultsummary-reply",
"discussiontools-replylink",
"discussiontools-replywidget-loading"
]
},
"ext.discussionTools.init": {
"packageFiles": [
"dt.init.js"
],
"styles": "dt.init.less",
"dependencies": [
"mediawiki.Uri",
"ext.discussionTools.controller"
]
},
"ext.discussionTools.debug": {
"packageFiles": [
"dt.debug.js",
"highlighter.js"
],
"styles": "highlighter.css",
"dependencies": [
"ext.discussionTools.parser"
]
},
"ext.discussionTools.ReplyWidget": {
"packageFiles": [
"dt.ui.ReplyWidget.js"
],
"styles": [
"dt.ui.ReplyWidget.less"
],
"messages": [
"discussiontools-replywidget-anon-warning",
"discussiontools-replywidget-cancel",
"discussiontools-replywidget-preview",
"discussiontools-replywidget-reply",
"discussiontools-replywidget-terms-click"
],
"dependencies": [
"ext.discussionTools.controller",
"mediawiki.widgets.AbandonEditDialog"
]
},
"ext.discussionTools.ReplyWidgetPlain": {
"packageFiles": [
"dt.ui.ReplyWidgetPlain.js"
],
"dependencies": [
"ext.discussionTools.ReplyWidget",
"oojs-ui-core",
"mediawiki.editfont.styles",
"mediawiki.user",
"mediawiki.jqueryMsg"
]
},
"ext.discussionTools.ReplyWidgetVisual": {
"packageFiles": [
"dt.ui.ReplyWidgetVisual.js",
"CommentTarget.js",
"CommentTargetWidget.js"
],
"styles": [
"CommentTargetWidget.less"
],
"dependencies": [
"ext.discussionTools.ReplyWidget",
"ext.visualEditor.mwcore",
"ext.visualEditor.mwwikitext",
"ext.visualEditor.core.desktop",
"ext.visualEditor.desktopTarget",
"ext.visualEditor.mwextensions.desktop"
]
}
},
"QUnitTestModule": {
"localBasePath": "tests/qunit",
"remoteExtPath": "DiscussionTools/tests/qunit",
"packageFiles": [
"index.js",
"utils.js",
{
"name": "data-en.json",
"callback": "DiscussionToolsData::getLocalData",
"callbackParam": "en"
},
"data/enwiki-config.json",
"data/enwiki-data.json",
"data/plwiki-config.json",
"data/plwiki-data.json",
"pages/oldparser/en-913983958.json",
"pages/parsoid/en-913983958.json",
"pages/oldparser/pl-55171451.json",
"pages/parsoid/pl-55171451.json",
"other/no-heading.json",
"modifier.test.js",
"parser.test.js"
],
"templates": {
"oldparser/en-913983958.html": "pages/oldparser/en-913983958.html",
"oldparser/en-913983958-modified.html": "pages/oldparser/en-913983958-modified.html",
"parsoid/en-913983958.html": "pages/parsoid/en-913983958.html",
"parsoid/en-913983958-modified.html": "pages/parsoid/en-913983958-modified.html",
"oldparser/pl-55171451.html": "pages/oldparser/pl-55171451.html",
"oldparser/pl-55171451-modified.html": "pages/oldparser/pl-55171451-modified.html",
"parsoid/pl-55171451.html": "pages/parsoid/pl-55171451.html",
Pick reply insertion point based on parser tree, not DOM tree I don't like that I had to special-case `<p>` tags (top-level comments) in this code. I feel like it should be possible to handle top-level comments and replies in a generic way, but I couldn't find a way to do it that actually worked. Notes about changes to the behavior, based on the test cases: * Given a top-level comment A, if there was a "list gap" in the replies to it: previously new replies would be incorrectly added at the location of the gap; now they are added after the last reply. (T242822) Example: "pl", comment at "08:23, 29 wrz 2018 (CEST)" * Given a top-level comment A and a reply to it B that skips an indentation level: previously new replies to A would be added with the same indentation level as B; now they are added with the indentation level of A plus one. (The old behavior wasn't a bug, and this is an accidental effect of other changes, but it seems okay.) Example: "pl", comment at "03:22, 30 wrz 2018 (CEST)" and reply at "09:43, 30 wrz 2018 (CEST)" * Given a top-level comment A, a reply to it B, and a following top-level comment C that starts at the same indentation level as B: previously new replies to A would be incorrectly added in the middle of the comment C, due to the DOM list structure; now they are added before C. (T241391) (It seems that comment C was supposed to be a multi-line reply that was wrongly indented. Unfortunately we have no way to distinguish this case from a top-level multi-line comment that just happens to start with a bullet list.) Example: "pl", comments at "03:36, 24 paź 2018 (CEST)", "08:35, 24 paź 2018 (CEST)", "17:14, 24 paź 2018 (CEST)" * In the "en" example, there are some other changes where funnily nested tags result in slightly different results with the new code. They don't look important. * In rare cases, we must split an existing list to add a reply in the right place. (Basically add `</ul>` before the reply and `<ul>` after, but it's a bit awkward in DOM terms.) Example: split-list.html, comment "aaa"; also split-list2.html (which is the result of saving the previous reply), comment "aaa" * The modifier can no longer generate DOM that is invalid HTML, fixing a FIXME in modifier.test.js (or at least, it doesn't happen in these test cases any more). Bug: T241391 Bug: T242822 Change-Id: I2a70db01e9a8916c5636bc59ea8490166966d5ec
2020-01-15 06:09:13 +00:00
"parsoid/pl-55171451-modified.html": "pages/parsoid/pl-55171451-modified.html",
"other/no-heading.html": "other/no-heading.html",
Pick reply insertion point based on parser tree, not DOM tree I don't like that I had to special-case `<p>` tags (top-level comments) in this code. I feel like it should be possible to handle top-level comments and replies in a generic way, but I couldn't find a way to do it that actually worked. Notes about changes to the behavior, based on the test cases: * Given a top-level comment A, if there was a "list gap" in the replies to it: previously new replies would be incorrectly added at the location of the gap; now they are added after the last reply. (T242822) Example: "pl", comment at "08:23, 29 wrz 2018 (CEST)" * Given a top-level comment A and a reply to it B that skips an indentation level: previously new replies to A would be added with the same indentation level as B; now they are added with the indentation level of A plus one. (The old behavior wasn't a bug, and this is an accidental effect of other changes, but it seems okay.) Example: "pl", comment at "03:22, 30 wrz 2018 (CEST)" and reply at "09:43, 30 wrz 2018 (CEST)" * Given a top-level comment A, a reply to it B, and a following top-level comment C that starts at the same indentation level as B: previously new replies to A would be incorrectly added in the middle of the comment C, due to the DOM list structure; now they are added before C. (T241391) (It seems that comment C was supposed to be a multi-line reply that was wrongly indented. Unfortunately we have no way to distinguish this case from a top-level multi-line comment that just happens to start with a bullet list.) Example: "pl", comments at "03:36, 24 paź 2018 (CEST)", "08:35, 24 paź 2018 (CEST)", "17:14, 24 paź 2018 (CEST)" * In the "en" example, there are some other changes where funnily nested tags result in slightly different results with the new code. They don't look important. * In rare cases, we must split an existing list to add a reply in the right place. (Basically add `</ul>` before the reply and `<ul>` after, but it's a bit awkward in DOM terms.) Example: split-list.html, comment "aaa"; also split-list2.html (which is the result of saving the previous reply), comment "aaa" * The modifier can no longer generate DOM that is invalid HTML, fixing a FIXME in modifier.test.js (or at least, it doesn't happen in these test cases any more). Bug: T241391 Bug: T242822 Change-Id: I2a70db01e9a8916c5636bc59ea8490166966d5ec
2020-01-15 06:09:13 +00:00
"other/split-list.html": "other/split-list.html",
"other/split-list-modified.html": "other/split-list-modified.html",
"other/split-list2.html": "other/split-list2.html",
"other/split-list2-modified.html": "other/split-list2-modified.html"
},
"dependencies": [
"ext.discussionTools.modifier",
"ext.discussionTools.parser"
]
},
"AutoloadClasses": {
"DiscussionToolsData": "includes/DiscussionToolsData.php",
"DiscussionToolsHooks": "includes/DiscussionToolsHooks.php"
},
"Hooks": {
"BeforePageDisplay": [
"DiscussionToolsHooks::onBeforePageDisplay"
],
"GetBetaFeaturePreferences": "DiscussionToolsHooks::onGetBetaPreferences",
"ListDefinedTags": "DiscussionToolsHooks::onListDefinedTags",
"ChangeTagsListActive": "DiscussionToolsHooks::onListDefinedTags",
"RecentChange_save": "DiscussionToolsHooks::onRecentChangeSave"
},
"config": {
"DiscussionToolsEnable": {
"value": true,
"description": "Enable DiscussionTools on talk pages."
},
"DiscussionToolsBeta": {
"value": false,
"description": "Make DiscussionTools a BetaFeature."
},
"DiscussionToolsUseVisualEditor": {
"value": false,
"description": "Use VisualEditor for editing replies (both visual and wikitext)."
}
},
"ConfigRegistry": {
"discussiontools": "GlobalVarConfig::newInstance"
},
"type": "other"
}