mkdir -p ikiwiki-tag-test/raw/a_dir/ ikiwiki-tag-test/rendered/
- echo '[[!taglink a_tag]]' > ikiwiki-tag-test/raw/a_dir/a_page.mdwn
+ echo '\[[!taglink a_tag]]' > ikiwiki-tag-test/raw/a_dir/a_page.mdwn
ikiwiki --verbose --plugin tag --plugin autoindex --plugin mdwn --set autoindex_commit=0 --set tagbase=tag --set tag_autocreate=1 --set tag_autocreate_commit=0 ikiwiki-tag-test/raw/ ikiwiki-tag-test/rendered/
ls -al ikiwiki-tag-test/raw/.ikiwiki/transient/
ls -al ikiwiki-tag-test/rendered/tag/
Shouldn't `ikiwiki-tag-test/raw/.ikiwiki/transient/tag.mdwn` and `ikiwiki-tag-test/rendered/tag/index.html` exist?
+
+[[!tag patch users/smcv/ready]]
+[[!template id=gitbranch branch=smcv/ready/autoindex author=smcv
+ browse=http://git.pseudorandom.co.uk/smcv/ikiwiki.git/shortlog/refs/heads/ready/autoindex]]
+[[!template id=gitbranch branch=smcv/ready/autoindex-more-often author=smcv
+ browse=http://git.pseudorandom.co.uk/smcv/ikiwiki.git/shortlog/refs/heads/ready/autoindex-more-often]]
+
+> To have a starting point to (maybe) change this, my `ready/autoindex`
+> branch adds a regression test for the current behaviour, both with
+> and without `autoindex_commit` enabled. It also fixes an unnecessary
+> and potentially harmful special case for the transient directory.
+>
+> The fact that files in underlays (including transient files) don't
+> trigger autoindexing is deliberate. However, this is the second
+> request to change this behaviour: the first was
+> [[!debbug 611068]], which has a patch from Tuomas Jormola.
+> On that bug report, Joey explains why it's undesirable
+> for the original behaviour of autoindex (when the
+> index isn't transient).
+>
+> I'm not sure whether the same reasoning still applies when the
+> index is transient, though (`autoindex_commit => 0`),
+> because the index pages won't be cluttering up people's
+> git repositories any more? My `autoindex-more` branch changes
+> the logic so it will do what you want in the `autoindex_commit => 0`
+> case, and amends the appropriate regression test. --[[smcv]]
+
+>> the autoindex-more-often branch looks good to me in general.
+>>
+>> i do have doubts about the 3ba2ef1a patch ("remove unnecessary special case
+>> for transient underlay"): now that we consider the complete transient
+>> directory as well, the sequence in which the refresh hooks are called starts
+>> to matter, and pages created by other plugins in a similar fashion as by
+>> autoindex will only be included the next time refresh gets called.
+>>
+>> *addendum:* i just found where i discussed the issue of fighting transient
+>> pages last, it was on [[todo/alias directive]]. the example cited there
+>> (conflicts with autotag) would probably work here as well. (imagine a
+>> `tags/project/completed` and a `tags/project/inprogress` exist, and a page
+>> is tagge `tags/project`. will that be an autoindex or an autotag?)
+>>
+>> --[[chrysn]]
+
+>>> That's a fair point. I think what happens is down to commit vs. refresh
+>>> timing.
+>>>
+>>> If pages tagged t/p/c, t/p/i and t/p are all created between one
+>>> refresh and the next, with none of those tag pages existing, I think the
+>>> answer is that they would all be autotags, because until t/p/c and
+>>> t/p/i are created, there's no reason to need t/p as an autoindex.
+>>>
+>>> If there were already pages tagged t/p/c and t/p/i at the previous
+>>> refresh, then t/p would already be an autoindex, and that's a
+>>> valid page, so autotagging wouldn't touch it.
+>>>
+>>> I can't see much reason to prefer one over the other; the ideal answer
+>>> is probably to have a tag-cloud *and* a list of child pages, but this
+>>> seems a weird enough thing to do that I'd be OK with a wiki user
+>>> having to disambiguate it themselves. "Whichever automatic process
+>>> happens first, happens" is at least easy to explain, and I consider
+>>> both autoindices and autotags to be time-saving conveniences rather
+>>> than something fundamental. --s
+
+>>>> i think a behavior that does the right thing when there is a right thing
+>>>> and *something* when there is ambiguity is ok for now; especially, it's
+>>>> not up to the autoindex branch to come up with a solution to the general
+>>>> problem. --[[chrysn]]