Thoughts on example setup file

[git.ikiwiki.info.git] / doc / todo / pagespec_expansions.mdwn

diff --git a/doc/todo/pagespec_expansions.mdwn b/doc/todo/pagespec_expansions.mdwn
index 9915d8b3b12b1cd6a580c662dfef5eb85f05d53b..6107f5489673d847f20d86512eb9e3579b4c4e4a 100644 (file)
--- a/doc/todo/pagespec_expansions.mdwn
+++ b/doc/todo/pagespec_expansions.mdwn
@@ -48,6 +48,12 @@ I can see why it might not be much of an improvement. :) --Ethan
 >>> Ah.. in that case, why not use "a/b/* and !a/b/*/*" ? No need for a new
 >>> symbol. --[[Joey]]
 
 >>> Ah.. in that case, why not use "a/b/* and !a/b/*/*" ? No need for a new
 >>> symbol. --[[Joey]]
 

+>>>> I know it's not necessary, but it would be helpful. --Ethan
+
+>>>>> I don't see the need for a new syntax since it's only a little long
+>>>>> using the old one. And of course even that can now be shortened: 
+>>>>> "./* and !./*/*" --[[Joey]]
+

 OK, I took a shot at implementing the changes. I was thinking about making
 pagespecs relative by default but I couldn't decide whether page
 `foo/bar` inlining `*` should match `foo/bar/*` or `foo/*`.
 OK, I took a shot at implementing the changes. I was thinking about making
 pagespecs relative by default but I couldn't decide whether page
 `foo/bar` inlining `*` should match `foo/bar/*` or `foo/*`.


@@ -114,9 +120,32 @@ and you can see it work at
 >>>    of deeply nested subdirs.
 >>> --[[Joey]]
 
 >>>    of deeply nested subdirs.
 >>> --[[Joey]]
 

+>>>> Context-dependence was my conclusion too. My feeling is that inlining
+>>>> in a subdirectory of the current page is more common, but I don't 
+>>>> really know. However, I think the changes as written should work OK
+>>>> with my index patch and allowing inlining from a/b/c/, so I'm
+>>>> satisfied. --Ethan
+

 > I've committed support for ./ to ikiwiki now, based on your patch.
 > I've committed support for ./ to ikiwiki now, based on your patch.

+> [[todo/done]]

 > --[[Joey]]
 
 >> Cool! I haven't played with it yet, but looking over the patch, I see that
 >> you added another parameter to match_glob, which is an approach that didn't
 >> occur to me. I like it, it's more flexible. --Ethan
 > --[[Joey]]
 
 >> Cool! I haven't played with it yet, but looking over the patch, I see that
 >> you added another parameter to match_glob, which is an approach that didn't
 >> occur to me. I like it, it's more flexible. --Ethan

+
+One last thing -- could you either change:
+
+                $from=~s!/?[^/]+$!!;
+
+to 
+
+                $from=~s!/?[^/]*$!!;
+
+Or could you put in:
+
+                $glob =~ s!//!/!g;
+
+somewhere? Or should I just add this to my index patch? --Ethan
+
+> If it's specific to your index patch, let's put it in there. --[[Joey]]