They are not generated by MediaWiki, but they often appear when users
sign others' unsigned comments by copy-pasting the timestamp from the
history page.
Add test config data for nlwiki, exported by running this in the
browser console:
copy(
JSON.stringify( { wgArticlePath, wgNamespaceIds, wgFormattedNamespaces }, null, 2 ) + '\n' +
JSON.stringify( mw.loader.moduleRegistry['ext.discussionTools.parser'].packageExports['data.json'], null, 2 )
);
Bug: T245784
Change-Id: Icbcdc5a028e9ce2cb09173f87769e525ec3082fc
I think directories like this make more sense for adding more test cases.
Depends-On: I9153851fe162c012967fda00d3e1f81964a8dce9
Change-Id: Ibc72b747a75c72643c1fc04eae49bd15656e8104
The most common case of edit conflicts on talk pages is several people
responding to the same comment at the same time.[citation needed]
We can easily resolve this case by fetching the latest revision of the
page and re-running our code to insert a reply on it.
When we can't insert a reply, that probably means the parent comment
was deleted or moved, so display an error message indicating that
instead of the generic one.
Bug: T240643
Change-Id: Ic686acc747580d46779960211a02e9830a6ae86f
By default, DiscussionTools loads on all talk pages when the extension
is installed. This can now be disabled by setting the configuration
option `$wgDiscussionToolsEnable=false`.
To test DiscussionTools, one can now use the query parameter
`?dtenable=1`, which allows it to be loaded on any wikitext page
(overriding the config option).
Bug: T243621
Change-Id: I3d5a9cc9a4183fb6951f05c557b1d42735a9df7c
This sets up the tags:
* discussiontools
* discussiontools-reply
* discussiontools-edit (not yet implemented)
* discussiontools-newsection (not yet implemented)
The tags are flagged as user-addable, because otherwise they can't be
passed through to the VE API (at least, not without editing it so that
it explicitly knows about them, which seems like a strange
interdependency). It's assumed that letting users who know about the
tags add them to random changes via action=editchangetags would be
(a) the pettiest and most inconsequential vandalism possible, and
(b) unlikely to happen.
This relies upon I2c1d0f8d69bc03e5c1877c790247e165f160e966 in
VisualEditor to not also tag the edits with `visualeditor`.
Bug: T242184
Change-Id: I4e5e26afdd52279df242e1912f073b415b812c3b
The loop in parser.js assumed that there was always a heading before
any comments (not counting the page title, only section headings).
Bug: T243869
Change-Id: I3a0bb06716e75d4a17e25c40748673a071ee5f30
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
Document the current behavior of the modifier (which inserts the
replies into the DOM tree), so that we can more easily see the effect
of changes in I2a70db01e9a8916c5636bc59ea8490166966d5ec.
Basically, add a reply to every comment, and dump the resulting HTML,
comparing it to previously generated expected HTML (which can be
checked visually). Have a look at the new HTML files.
Notably, the very first section in the "pl" example demonstrates a
case of wrong reply location due to list gap :) (T242822).
Change-Id: I4aed0f0b112f53d98e3fe1da4d40db8687c7e537
* Add config option $wgDiscussionToolsUseVisualEditor (default false).
* Add new modules ext.discussionTools.ReplyWidgetPlain and ...ReplyWidgetVisual,
replacing ...ReplyWidget. Load only one of them depending on the config.
TODO:
* Also add the visual mode of VisualEditor, this only uses NWE now.
There is already code to support saving from it, but no mode
switcher tool
Co-Authored-By: Ed Sanders <esanders@wikimedia.org>
Co-Authored-By: Bartosz Dziewoński <matma.rex@gmail.com>
Change-Id: I9b6db865d51baf400fb715dc7aa68ccd8cdd4905
And actually discard the contents when they confirm.
For now this uses the generic editor message, but that can
be tweaked later.
Bug: T240271
Change-Id: I2dfa19b2cc7ac49d7efea37ac8c9429c75934a91
The packageFiles system makes it easier to export site config data
from PHP to JS, which we need a lot of, but it's awkward when mixing
it with defining and accessing classes via a namespace like mw.dt.
The only thing remaining in mw.dt is mw.dt.pageThreads, which is
described to be "for debugging", so we should keep it easy to type.
Also we still use the namespace for documenting classes.
Everything else can be reached by require()'ing a ResourceLoader
module, for example instead of `mw.dt.ui.ReplyWidget`
you'd do `require( 'ext.discussionTools.ReplyWidget' )`.
(When debugging from browser console, use `mw.loader.require` instead.)
Change-Id: I6496abcf58c21658d6fd0f3fc1db1f7380a89df7
Tests that handle a specific case and describe what they are testing
would be nice… but tests that just document the current status to
avoid regressions are also okay and easier to add.
Change-Id: I0b3530ae0e77de70932aaf623f5290d1876699a0
We removed it in c40c112514 when we added
a more practical use for the parser, but I keep wishing I had it to
experiment with the parser code.
Now it's off by default and can be used by adding &dtdebug=1 to the URL.
Change-Id: I6a92bfe7f55af0949b391606b04c3cfa0f996f2a
Add the Moment Timezone library. Add a script for managing libraries,
like in MediaWiki core.
Depends-On: I9a59a6ad01850b30327e4215f2be61b8d1c41277
Change-Id: I64bc79e7d0ccdf42b006e5a225c8aa70ea5f4e15
* For the proof of concept, VE will be used to write comments
with no fallback.
* Parsoid will be required for parsing pages
At some point in the future we may have a non-VE comment widget
fallback and Parsoid may be part of core, in which case we can
re-evaluate this hard dependency.
Change-Id: Ib694f2a4b2a640bb29b564056d9279e53fff6c9c
