The existing comment IDs can't be used to find the same comment on
a different revision or page (when it's transcluded), because they
depend on the comment's parent and its position on the page.
Comment names depend only on the author and timestamp. The trade-off
is that they can't distinguish comments posted within the same minute,
or in the same edit, so we will still need the IDs sometimes.
Prefer using comment names when replying, if they're not ambiguous.
This fixes T273413 and T275821.
Heading names depend on the author and timestamp of the oldest comment.
This way we don't have to detect changes to the heading text, but we
can't distinguish headings without any comments.
Bug: T274685
Bug: T273413
Bug: T275821
Change-Id: Id85c50ba38d1e532cec106708c077b908a3fcd49
After recent changes allowing ThreadItems to have IDs, they can now
also have warnings about duplicate IDs.
Bug: T267035
Change-Id: If3edfe34e6e29741e29fac8946a3c88badc4ab7f
Our threads now also contain all replies to their sub-threads.
This is similar to how sections work in MediaWiki, where the parent
section also contains the content of all the lower-level sections.
We're going to need this for notifications about replies in a thread.
Bug: T264478
Change-Id: I241fc58e2088a7555942824b0f184ed21e3a8b6f
The output of CommentFormatter::addReplyLinks() and consequently
ThreadItem::jsonSerialize() can end up in the HTTP cache (Varnish) on
Wikimedia wikis. We need to consider that when changing that code.
Introduce a concept of legacy ID (generated by the older algorithm
after it changes), add some placeholder code that will generate them
in the future, and update some code to find comments by either normal
or legacy IDs.
Add dire comments in a bunch of places (as if that ever helps).
Bug: T264478
Change-Id: I4368f366800ab21b8b184b09378037614fdecd33
Previously, parser would output offsets that don't exist in their
containers, because we were pretending that entities are parts of
their neighboring text nodes.
Turns out it's much easier to do it right when going backwards.
Change-Id: I9bccca2d403f1a976ae517449989170cdd99721e
When adding a reply, we take a node at the end of the previous comment,
compare that comment's indentation level to the expected indentation level
of the reply, and add (or remove) that number of wrapper lists.
The existing code did not consider that comments may have lists within
them, and so the indentation of that node may not match the indentation
of the comment.
Bug: T252702
Change-Id: Icc5ff19783d2b213bff99f283cb0599a8b5c1ab4
