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
Even when you have multiple signatures by multiple users in one
paragraph (or list item), it's still basically a single comment.
We don't want to offer multiple buttons to reply to it.
The changed parser test cases are illustrative:
* All affected comments in the "pl" example are comments with a
"post-scriptum", which is now more intuitively treated as part of
the main comment.
* The first comment in the "en" example would probably have been
better if it wasn't merged, but a weird use of the outdent template
causes us to not be able to distinguish that the two parts of the
comment display on separate lines.
* The last comment in the "en" example (isn't that neat?) was previously
incorrectly treated as two comments, because there's a timestamp in
the middle of it (the user is referring to another comment).
* Remaining affected comments in the "en" example are also comments
with a "post-scriptum" and their treatment is clearly better now.
It also accidentally fixes some problems with modifier tests (but not
all), where previously <dl> nodes would be inserted in the middle of
<p> nodes, to reply to the comments which are now merged.
Bug: T240640
Change-Id: I0f2d9238aff75d78286250affd323cd145661a11
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
Sepatate #teardown and #tryTeardown methods to make it
obvious what they do. Have <escape> call #tryTeardown
like the cancel button.
Change-Id: Ica0f3295bfee378bcd15d0b6a3ccea3c7917ad9b
This avoids that the script is executed without the extension is
installed.
This avoids than an error when class is missing
Change-Id: I064d2be5dbaa3b43c8134e19694511398decba88
Add .phpcs.xml to run codesniffer against the extension.
The entry in composer.json is already there
Change-Id: If9de7e9b1b9439dc4d5fa2ba521883d13deaa739
* stylelint-config-wikimedia: 0.7.0 → 0.8.0
* grunt-stylelint: 0.12.0 → 0.13.0
Additional changes:
* And updating CoC link to use Special:MyLanguage (T202047).
* Set `private: true` in package.json.
* Set `root: true` in .eslintrc.json (T206485).
* Added .eslintcache to .gitignore.
* Removing manual reportUnusedDisableDirectives for eslint.
Change-Id: I18a1f384d62d71ed40be67f20000a03cb741a7d0
* 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
I did this wrong in a6147ffac8, the
'dt-init-done' class was never cleared. Put it on another element.
Bug: T241861
Change-Id: I136bd9c12bcc80cff01f5d26a8a53524f0c533c6
Unfortunately mw.Api#parse doesn't provide us with that part of the
response, so we have to manually construct the parameters.
Bug: T241193
Change-Id: Ie91d5ebc2ef483a69524b838dd3cb852e7c85cd2
The hook 'wikipage.content' fires whenever new "page content" is added
dynamically (e.g. after a VisualEditor edit). It's used by the code
for sortable tables, collapsible content, etc., to ensure they behave
correctly after the page content is changed without reloading the page.
We use this hook to add our "Reply" links. However, VisualEditor (and
NWE) also fires this hook for the contents of the edit notices box (to
support collapsible boxes there: T179315). Our code was crashing
because it could not find talk page content inside of that, and this
crashed VisualEditor as well.
Use .each() to handle any number of results (0, 1 or more), instead of
assuming there is always 1.
Bug: T241396
Change-Id: I877b1ae06bf1d7cd585ec6f9c1fb596cc3b86e7e
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
* Query parameters for the API must be in lowercase.
* Also, 'starttimestamp' was misspelled.
Bug: T240643
Change-Id: I6497770dfc3a9512af063b846c3f73aa5603b637
Method can be used by preview logic later. Whitespace trimming
avoids sig ending up on newline in a <pre>.
Change-Id: If6f06f17395af0c6645082c1b9493be87422c059
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
