seems like it could be beneficial to have it rendered in the post-commit
hook, just like everything else in the wiki.
- I hope to statically generate it eventually, currently the problem is
- that it takes at least several seconds to generate the recentchanges
- page, and adding several seconds to every page edit is not desiriable. If
- the time can be reduced it could be done, I'm also not adverse to
- adding an optional way to statically render it even at the current speed.
+ > I hope to statically generate it eventually, currently the problem is
+ > that it takes at least several seconds to generate the recentchanges
+ > page, and adding several seconds to every page edit is not desiriable. If
+ > the time can be reduced it could be done, I'm also not adverse to
+ > adding an optional way to statically render it even at the current
+ > speed. --[[Joey]]
* Also, is it planned/desired that recent changes generate the same
information in RSS feed format? This seems like it could be a useful way
to keep track of the wiki as a whole.
- This is used by various interwiki type things, I think, so should be
- done..
+ > This is used by various interwiki type things, I think, so should be
+ > done.. --[[Joey]]
* Lastly, would it be possible to use the recent changes code with a
pagespec? I understand this sort of infringes on territory covered by the
once, when it's created, and I imagine some people -- some deranged,
obsessive-compulsive people like myself -- would like to know about the
changes made to existing pages as well as newly-created pages.
+
+ > That would work rather well for pages like [[todo]] and [[bugs]], where
+ > you want to know about any updates, not just initial
+ > creation. --[[JoshTriplett]]
+
+ > Of course you can use email subscriptions for that too.. --[[Joey]]
+
+ >> I have more thoughts on this topic which I will probably write
+ >> tomorrow. If you thought my other patches were blue-sky, wait until
+ >> you see this. --Ethan
+
+OK, so here's how I see the RecentChanges thing. I write blog posts and
+the inline plugin generates RSS feeds. Readers of RSS feeds are notified
+of new entries but not changes to old entries. I think it's rude to change
+something without telling your readers, so I'd like to address this.
+To tell the user that there have been changes, we can tell the user which
+page has been changed, the new text, the RCS comment relating to
+the change, and a diff of the actual changes. The new text probably isn't
+too useful (I have a very hard time rereading things for differences),
+so any modifications to inline to re-inline pages probably won't help,
+even if it were feasible (which I don't think it is). So instead we
+turn to creating diffs automatically and (maybe) inlining them.
+
+I suggest that for every commit, a diff is created automagically
+but not committed to the RCS. The page containing this diff would be
+a "virtual page", which cannot be edited and is not committed.
+(Committing here would be bad, because then it would create a new
+commit, which would need a new diff, which would need to be committed,
+etc.) Virtual pages would "expire" and be deleted if they were not
+depended on in some way.
+
+Let's say these pages are created in edits/commit_%d.mdwn. RecentChanges
+would then be a page which did nothing but inline the last 50 `edits/*`.
+This would give static generation and RSS/Atom feeds. The inline
+plugin could be optionally altered to inline pages from `edits/*`
+that match any pages in its pagespec, and through this we could get
+a recent-changes+pagespec thing. You could also exclude edits that have
+"minor" in the commit message (or some other thing that marks them as
+unremarkable).
+
+You could make an argument that I care way too much about what amounts
+to edits anyhow, but like Josh says, there are use cases for this.
+While this could be done with mail subscriptions, I can think of sites
+where you might want to disable all auth so that people can't edit
+your pages. --Ethan