From paul at luon.net Thu Aug 3 11:18:00 2006 From: paul at luon.net (Paul van Tilburg) Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2006 17:18:00 +0200 Subject: 0.5 release preparations In-Reply-To: <1150611100.6219.20.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1150611100.6219.20.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20060803151800.GD26114@power.luon.net> On Sun, Jun 18, 2006 at 02:11:40AM -0400, MenTaLguY wrote: > Okay, now that _why has Rakefiled the hobix tree, I guess we're gettin' > in gear for release-type activities. > > The question is: are there any burning issues/features/patches/pocket > lint you want to see addressed before 0.5 reaches the door? I say... go for it too! :) Paul -- Student @ Eindhoven | email: paul at luon.net University of Technology, The Netherlands | JID: paul at luon.net >>> Using the Power of Debian GNU/Linux <<< | GnuPG key ID: 0x50064181 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature Url : http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/hobix-is-the-way/attachments/20060803/59d9453b/attachment.bin From paul at luon.net Thu Aug 3 11:28:48 2006 From: paul at luon.net (Paul van Tilburg) Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2006 17:28:48 +0200 Subject: 0.5 release preparations In-Reply-To: <20060803151800.GD26114@power.luon.net> References: <1150611100.6219.20.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060803151800.GD26114@power.luon.net> Message-ID: <20060803152848.GE26114@power.luon.net> On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 05:18:00PM +0200, Paul van Tilburg wrote: > On Sun, Jun 18, 2006 at 02:11:40AM -0400, MenTaLguY wrote: > > Okay, now that _why has Rakefiled the hobix tree, I guess we're gettin' > > in gear for release-type activities. > > > > The question is: are there any burning issues/features/patches/pocket > > lint you want to see addressed before 0.5 reaches the door? > > I say... go for it too! :) BTW, may I request that the Hobix release uses the newer, fixed setup.rb release[1]? It would help me a lot with the Debian packaging. Kind regards, Paul 1: http://i.loveruby.net/archive/setup/setup-3.4.1.tar.gz -- Student @ Eindhoven | email: paul at luon.net University of Technology, The Netherlands | JID: paul at luon.net >>> Using the Power of Debian GNU/Linux <<< | GnuPG key ID: 0x50064181 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature Url : http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/hobix-is-the-way/attachments/20060803/91cf2a1d/attachment.bin From paul at luon.net Thu Aug 3 17:34:41 2006 From: paul at luon.net (Paul van Tilburg) Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2006 23:34:41 +0200 Subject: Proposal: metadata versioning Message-ID: <20060803213441.GB6373@power.luon.net> Hey all, I would like to propose something, but first I want to explain the context. I am working on (and using a pre-version of) a Hobix Debian package. In this package setup I used to disable the `upgrade' command because that would obviously conflict with the package system. I have disabled it by replacing the function by a "puts" that prints a message suggesting that the user updates the system. However, in the current version the upgrade command also removes metadata files[1] and this still needs to be done. But what if user A upgrades and user B still has weblogs with incorrect metadata files. So I propose to version the metadata files with, say, an integer X and adapt the following commands (assuming a previous installed Hobix to support version Y, with Y < X). * upgrade: - Try to get a new hobix (if any). - Remove the metadata files if the current supported metadata version X is bigger than the version of the current files, Y. * upgen, regen, list, post, ... - If no metadata exists, it is created with version X. - Complain if metadata is still version Y, while Hobix now uses version X, suggest user to use the upgrade command. This way, Hobix will always get to deal with metadata of a version it understands and I can disable the actualy getting and installing Hobix via the web but not the code removing metadata if it is too old. Thoughts? Kind regards, Paul fn1. With metadata files, I refer to index.search and index.hobix. -- Student @ Eindhoven | email: paul at luon.net University of Technology, The Netherlands | JID: paul at luon.net >>> Using the Power of Debian GNU/Linux <<< | GnuPG key ID: 0x50064181 From mental at rydia.net Thu Aug 3 22:23:20 2006 From: mental at rydia.net (MenTaLguY) Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2006 22:23:20 -0400 Subject: 0.5 release preparations In-Reply-To: <20060803152848.GE26114@power.luon.net> References: <1150611100.6219.20.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060803151800.GD26114@power.luon.net> <20060803152848.GE26114@power.luon.net> Message-ID: <1154658200.5345.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Thu, 2006-08-03 at 17:28 +0200, Paul van Tilburg wrote: > BTW, may I request that the Hobix release uses the newer, fixed setup.rb > release[1]? It would help me a lot with the Debian packaging. Done! Thanks. -mental -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 191 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part Url : http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/hobix-is-the-way/attachments/20060803/9038089d/attachment.bin From mental at rydia.net Thu Aug 3 22:29:10 2006 From: mental at rydia.net (MenTaLguY) Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2006 22:29:10 -0400 Subject: Proposal: metadata versioning In-Reply-To: <20060803213441.GB6373@power.luon.net> References: <20060803213441.GB6373@power.luon.net> Message-ID: <1154658550.5345.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Thu, 2006-08-03 at 23:34 +0200, Paul van Tilburg wrote: > However, in the current version the upgrade command also removes > metadata files[1] and this still needs to be done. But what if user A > upgrades and user B still has weblogs with incorrect metadata files. So > I propose to version the metadata files with, say, an integer X and > adapt the following commands (assuming a previous installed Hobix to > support version Y, with Y < X). Sounds good to me; I think this can be accomplished easily in Hobix::Storage::FileSys (FileSys#load_index in particular). Would you be interested in preparing a patch? -mental -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 191 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part Url : http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/hobix-is-the-way/attachments/20060803/1820313d/attachment.bin From mental at rydia.net Thu Aug 3 22:30:32 2006 From: mental at rydia.net (MenTaLguY) Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2006 22:30:32 -0400 Subject: Proposal: metadata versioning In-Reply-To: <1154658550.5345.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20060803213441.GB6373@power.luon.net> <1154658550.5345.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1154658632.5345.10.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Thu, 2006-08-03 at 22:29 -0400, MenTaLguY wrote: > Sounds good to me; I think this can be accomplished easily in > Hobix::Storage::FileSys (FileSys#load_index in particular). To be clear, I don't think it's necessary to print anything; just silently regenerate or ignore the index if it is not a supported version. -mental -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 191 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part Url : http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/hobix-is-the-way/attachments/20060803/4c938888/attachment.bin From paul at luon.net Tue Aug 8 17:01:28 2006 From: paul at luon.net (Paul van Tilburg) Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2006 23:01:28 +0200 Subject: Proposal: metadata versioning In-Reply-To: <1154658550.5345.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20060803213441.GB6373@power.luon.net> <1154658550.5345.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20060808210128.GI12296@power.luon.net> On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 10:29:10PM -0400, MenTaLguY wrote: > On Thu, 2006-08-03 at 23:34 +0200, Paul van Tilburg wrote: > > However, in the current version the upgrade command also removes > > metadata files[1] and this still needs to be done. But what if user A > > upgrades and user B still has weblogs with incorrect metadata files. So > > I propose to version the metadata files with, say, an integer X and > > adapt the following commands (assuming a previous installed Hobix to > > support version Y, with Y < X). > > Sounds good to me; I think this can be accomplished easily in > Hobix::Storage::FileSys (FileSys#load_index in particular). Already though something like that. > Would you be interested in preparing a patch? I will see if I can grasp the source and try something. This shouldn't be a blocker for the 0.5 release IMO, it can be a goal for the next? Regards, Paul -- Student @ Eindhoven | email: paul at luon.net University of Technology, The Netherlands | JID: paul at luon.net >>> Using the Power of Debian GNU/Linux <<< | GnuPG key ID: 0x50064181 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature Url : http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/hobix-is-the-way/attachments/20060808/4002f981/attachment-0001.bin From mental at rydia.net Tue Aug 8 17:58:25 2006 From: mental at rydia.net (MenTaLguY) Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2006 17:58:25 -0400 Subject: Proposal: metadata versioning In-Reply-To: <20060808210128.GI12296@power.luon.net> References: <20060803213441.GB6373@power.luon.net> <1154658550.5345.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060808210128.GI12296@power.luon.net> Message-ID: <1155074305.5612.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Tue, 2006-08-08 at 23:01 +0200, Paul van Tilburg wrote: > This shouldn't be a blocker for the 0.5 release IMO, it can be a goal > for the next? Yeah, that's fine. But it'll take me another week or two to get the release together anyhow (at minimum I've still got to compile a changelog/release notes and write a suitably _why-esque release announcement). -mental -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 191 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part Url : http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/hobix-is-the-way/attachments/20060808/7106c16f/attachment.bin From bowman at mazirian.com Mon Aug 14 22:05:27 2006 From: bowman at mazirian.com (Bradford R. Bowman) Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 22:05:27 -0400 Subject: Enabling comments. Message-ID: <1155607527.7454.31.camel@phandaal> Hey Hobix users: I am dealing with a fresh install of hobix from svn checked out about a week ago. I've never needed comments before and so I've never bothered to enable them on hobix. But now I need them and I have run into some difficulty. Here's some (hopefully) relevant information: I created the blog using the apache2-all option, which created what appeared to be the appropriate comments generating cgi script in htdocs/control complete with htacces files. Looks good so far. Mod_rewrite is enabled, overrides are allowed, the apache2 process has write access to the entries directory and most of the htdocs directory, and control/hobix.cgi is world executable. When trying to post comments, I get a 404 on /control/comment/category/myEntryTitle. Similarly, I receive a 404 for previews. I have enabled all manner of things in hobix.yml: requires: - hobix/storage/filesys - hobix/out/quick - hobix/comments - hobix/out/erb - hobix/out/rss - hobix/out/okaynews - hobix/out/atom - local - hobix/facets/comments - hobix/facets/publisher - hobix/facets/trackbacks - hobix/plugin/recent_comments - hobix/plugin/tags - hobix/plugin/sections I get the sense that I am missing something really easy. Any quick fixes? -- Bradford R. Bowman -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 191 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part Url : http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/hobix-is-the-way/attachments/20060814/78dd2185/attachment.bin From mental at rydia.net Tue Aug 15 00:47:10 2006 From: mental at rydia.net (MenTaLguY) Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2006 00:47:10 -0400 Subject: Enabling comments. In-Reply-To: <1155607527.7454.31.camel@phandaal> References: <1155607527.7454.31.camel@phandaal> Message-ID: <1155617230.5197.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Mon, 2006-08-14 at 22:05 -0400, Bradford R. Bowman wrote: > Mod_rewrite is enabled, overrides are allowed, the apache2 process has > write access to the entries directory and most of the htdocs directory, > and control/hobix.cgi is world executable. > > When trying to post comments, I get a 404 > on /control/comment/category/myEntryTitle. Similarly, I receive a 404 > for previews. Unfortunately I've not had occasion to use Hobix comments yet myself, but it's possible that the rewrite configuration in SVN is a little broken. I believe what should be happening is that /control/comment/... should be getting rewritten as /control/hobix.cgi/comment/..., but it sounds like that's not happening. _why, could you confirm that that's the way things are supposed to work? -mental -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 191 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part Url : http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/hobix-is-the-way/attachments/20060815/3ec1d9ab/attachment.bin From bowman at mazirian.com Tue Aug 15 01:13:22 2006 From: bowman at mazirian.com (Bradford R. Bowman) Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2006 01:13:22 -0400 Subject: Enabling comments. In-Reply-To: <1155617230.5197.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1155607527.7454.31.camel@phandaal> <1155617230.5197.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1155618802.7454.46.camel@phandaal> On Tue, 2006-08-15 at 00:47 -0400, MenTaLguY wrote: > I believe what should be happening is that /control/comment/... > should be getting rewritten as /control/hobix.cgi/comment/..., but it > sounds like that's not happening. That sounds right. In fact I've been tinkering with the mod_rewrite rule. Sadly, me and mod_rewrite have a checkered past. Some day I will best him. Till then, any suggestions would be appreciated. Here are the contents of the htaccess file I checked out: AddHandler cgi-script .cgi Options +FollowSymLinks +ExecCGI RewriteEngine On RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} -f RewriteRule ^(.*)$ /control/hobix.cgi Thanks for the reply MenTalguY. -- Bradford R. Bowman -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 191 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part Url : http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/hobix-is-the-way/attachments/20060815/0cc257e0/attachment.bin From mental at rydia.net Tue Aug 15 01:23:04 2006 From: mental at rydia.net (MenTaLguY) Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2006 01:23:04 -0400 Subject: Enabling comments. In-Reply-To: <1155618802.7454.46.camel@phandaal> References: <1155607527.7454.31.camel@phandaal> <1155617230.5197.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1155618802.7454.46.camel@phandaal> Message-ID: <1155619384.5197.18.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Tue, 2006-08-15 at 01:13 -0400, Bradford R. Bowman wrote: > AddHandler cgi-script .cgi > Options +FollowSymLinks +ExecCGI > > RewriteEngine On > RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} -f > RewriteRule ^(.*)$ /control/hobix.cgi Eh ... hrm. That RewriteCond means that the rule will only apply to paths whose corresponding physical files exist. I think what's intended is the reverse: RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-f Go via hobix.cgi when a physical file DOESN'T exist. And I'm assuming (pending _why's reply) that mapping /control/comment/category/myEntry to /control/hobix.cgi/control/comment/category/myEntry is the right thing here. If not, then I would also make this change: RewriteRule ^/control/(.*)$ /control/hobix.cgi/$1 Which would map /control/comment/category/myEntry to /control/hobix.cgi/comment/category/myEntry instead. Try the different combinations and see if anything works. This is something I would like to get sorted before 0.5 is released. -mental -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 191 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part Url : http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/hobix-is-the-way/attachments/20060815/3881353c/attachment.bin From bowman at mazirian.com Tue Aug 15 07:32:29 2006 From: bowman at mazirian.com (Bradford R. Bowman) Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2006 07:32:29 -0400 Subject: Enabling comments. In-Reply-To: <1155619384.5197.18.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1155607527.7454.31.camel@phandaal> <1155617230.5197.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1155618802.7454.46.camel@phandaal> <1155619384.5197.18.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1155641549.7454.64.camel@phandaal> > Try the different combinations and see if anything works. This is > something I would like to get sorted before 0.5 is released. > > -mental Ok, this will properly rewrite the url (I think): RewriteEngine On RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-f RewriteRule ^(.*)$ /control/hobix.cgi/$1 [R,L] That rewrites: /control/comment/category/myArticle To: /control/hobix.cgi/comment/category/myArticle But, hobix.cgi now returns: Missing field `hobix_comment:author'. Please back up and try again. I did fill in both fields. Now we're in a whole new bug hunting mode, I think. :) Thanks again for your suggestions, mental. -- Bradford R. Bowman -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 191 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part Url : http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/hobix-is-the-way/attachments/20060815/a33b55cb/attachment.bin From bowman at mazirian.com Sat Aug 19 18:18:41 2006 From: bowman at mazirian.com (Bradford R. Bowman) Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2006 18:18:41 -0400 Subject: Enabling comments. In-Reply-To: <1155641549.7454.64.camel@phandaal> References: <1155607527.7454.31.camel@phandaal> <1155617230.5197.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1155618802.7454.46.camel@phandaal> <1155619384.5197.18.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1155641549.7454.64.camel@phandaal> Message-ID: <1156025921.7182.22.camel@phandaal> On Tue, 2006-08-15 at 07:32 -0400, Bradford R. Bowman wrote: > Ok, this will properly rewrite the url (I think): > > RewriteEngine On > RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-f > RewriteRule ^(.*)$ /control/hobix.cgi/$1 [R,L] Oops, wrong. In fact the above suggestion will make a mess of things. The only real problem is the rewrite condition statement: - RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} -f + RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-f It took a bit of getting familiar with webapp.rb and directing some stderr into the apache logs, to realize it was an easy fix. I also did not give apache write permission to enough of htdocs, which made the regeneration fail. Happy commenting! Now let's see if the publisher works. And what's this bixwik thing anyway? -- Bradford R. Bowman -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 191 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part Url : http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/hobix-is-the-way/attachments/20060819/493a7405/attachment.bin From mental at rydia.net Mon Aug 21 15:06:48 2006 From: mental at rydia.net (MenTaLguY) Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 15:06:48 -0400 Subject: Enabling comments. In-Reply-To: <1156025921.7182.22.camel@phandaal> References: <1155607527.7454.31.camel@phandaal> <1155617230.5197.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1155618802.7454.46.camel@phandaal> <1155619384.5197.18.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1155641549.7454.64.camel@phandaal> <1156025921.7182.22.camel@phandaal> Message-ID: <1156187208.5255.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Sat, 2006-08-19 at 18:18 -0400, Bradford R. Bowman wrote: > Happy commenting! Now let's see if the publisher works. And what's this > bixwik thing anyway? A wiki, elvishly built upon Hobix. -mental -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 191 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part Url : http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/hobix-is-the-way/attachments/20060821/ebd6c39e/attachment.bin From paul at luon.net Wed Aug 23 08:35:23 2006 From: paul at luon.net (Paul van Tilburg) Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 14:35:23 +0200 Subject: 0.5 release preparations In-Reply-To: <1154658200.5345.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1150611100.6219.20.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060803151800.GD26114@power.luon.net> <20060803152848.GE26114@power.luon.net> <1154658200.5345.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20060823123523.GE30265@power.luon.net> Hello again, On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 10:23:20PM -0400, MenTaLguY wrote: > On Thu, 2006-08-03 at 17:28 +0200, Paul van Tilburg wrote: > > BTW, may I request that the Hobix release uses the newer, fixed setup.rb > > release[1]? It would help me a lot with the Debian packaging. > > Done! Thanks. I found a ew issue: setup.rb assumes that shared data is contained in the data/ directory, not share/, so here it completely skips the installation of share/*. I wonder... has this ever worked even? :) Is it trivial to change this? Paul -- Student @ Eindhoven | email: paul at luon.net University of Technology, The Netherlands | JID: paul at luon.net >>> Using the Power of Debian GNU/Linux <<< | GnuPG key ID: 0x50064181 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature Url : http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/hobix-is-the-way/attachments/20060823/d6ff4a27/attachment.bin From bowman at mazirian.com Wed Aug 30 13:22:03 2006 From: bowman at mazirian.com (Bradford R. Bowman) Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 13:22:03 -0400 Subject: One last question on comments Message-ID: <20060830172203.GA31824@mazirian.com> I appreciate that this pretty much a fix it yourself kind of project, but I was hoping that someone might provide some quick insight on this issue. I recently set up a hobix blog for a project I am working on. The base url is www.example.com/blogame/ rather than www.example.com/ The link variable in hobix.yml for this blog is set to www.example.com/blogname/ After adjusting hobix.out.quick to reflect the proper url for the comment form, comments do get properly posted, however, the redirect that occurs as a result of the comments.rb facet doesn't reflect the fact that the blog is not situated at the root. Instead, it redirects to www.example.com/entry_id and not to www.example.com/blogname/entry_id. I've taken a look at the commments plugin, but thought I should ask if there was a quick known fix for this before I started breaking things. Thanks. -- Bradford R. Bowman GnuPG public key [0x3EE183C6] Available at http://pgp.mit.edu -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature Url : http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/hobix-is-the-way/attachments/20060830/eb90b7a2/attachment-0001.bin From bowman at mazirian.com Wed Aug 30 16:39:12 2006 From: bowman at mazirian.com (Bradford R. Bowman) Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 16:39:12 -0400 Subject: One last question on comments In-Reply-To: <20060830172203.GA31824@mazirian.com> References: <20060830172203.GA31824@mazirian.com> Message-ID: <20060830203912.GD31824@mazirian.com> On Wed, Aug 30, 2006 at 01:22:03PM -0400, Bradford R. Bowman wrote: > I appreciate that this pretty much a fix it yourself kind of project, > but I was hoping that someone might provide some quick insight on this > issue. > > I recently set up a hobix blog for a project I am working on. The > base url is www.example.com/blogame/ rather than www.example.com/ > The link variable in hobix.yml for this blog is set to > www.example.com/blogname/ After adjusting hobix.out.quick to reflect > the proper url for the comment form, comments do get properly posted, > however, the redirect that occurs as a result of the comments.rb facet > doesn't reflect the fact that the blog is not situated at the root. > Instead, it redirects to www.example.com/entry_id and not to > www.example.com/blogname/entry_id. I've taken a look at the commments > plugin, but thought I should ask if there was a quick known fix for this > before I started breaking things. I fixed this by patching the redirect stuff in facets/comments.rb as follows: # Redirect link = @weblog.output_entry_map[entry_id] full_link = "#{@weblog.link}/#{link[:page].link}" app.setup_redirection( 302, full_link ) But I'm a big nooby, so please feel free to offer a better way. -- Bradford R. Bowman GnuPG public key [0x3EE183C6] Available at http://pgp.mit.edu -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature Url : http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/hobix-is-the-way/attachments/20060830/6ed4c4ff/attachment.bin From mental at rydia.net Wed Aug 30 19:01:47 2006 From: mental at rydia.net (MenTaLguY) Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 19:01:47 -0400 Subject: One last question on comments In-Reply-To: <20060830203912.GD31824@mazirian.com> References: <20060830172203.GA31824@mazirian.com> <20060830203912.GD31824@mazirian.com> Message-ID: <1156978907.12723.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Wed, 2006-08-30 at 16:39 -0400, Bradford R. Bowman wrote: > # Redirect > link = @weblog.output_entry_map[entry_id] > full_link = "#{@weblog.link}/#{link[:page].link}" > app.setup_redirection( 302, full_link ) I believe the standard approach is to use Weblog#expand_path in such an instance, e.g.: # Redirect link = @weblog.output_entry_map[entry_id] app.setup_redirection( 302, @weblog.expand_path( link[:page].link ) ) I've committed this to trunk; could you please svn up and give it a try? -mental -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 191 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part Url : http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/hobix-is-the-way/attachments/20060830/5ab69825/attachment.bin From bowman at mazirian.com Wed Aug 30 20:45:47 2006 From: bowman at mazirian.com (Bradford R. Bowman) Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 20:45:47 -0400 Subject: One last question on comments In-Reply-To: <1156978907.12723.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20060830172203.GA31824@mazirian.com> <20060830203912.GD31824@mazirian.com> <1156978907.12723.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1156985147.5900.24.camel@phandaal> > I believe the standard approach is to use Weblog#expand_path in such an > instance, e.g.: > > # Redirect > link = @weblog.output_entry_map[entry_id] > app.setup_redirection( 302, @weblog.expand_path( link[:page].link ) ) > > I've committed this to trunk; could you please svn up and give it a try? Mental, thanks for steering me straight. The updated source works. I noted, however, that line 7 of share/default-blog.apache-cgi.patch seems to have reverted. It needs to be as follows for comments to work at all: RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-f Also, for someone using hobix as I described earlier in this thread, there are two other places, both in lib/hobix/comments.rb, that similar problems will arise. At line 64:
and at line 72: onClick="new Ajax.Request('/control/preview', ........... Thanks again. -- Bradford R. Bowman -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 191 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part Url : http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/hobix-is-the-way/attachments/20060830/9e92d14a/attachment.bin From mental at rydia.net Wed Aug 30 23:37:52 2006 From: mental at rydia.net (MenTaLguY) Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 23:37:52 -0400 Subject: One last question on comments In-Reply-To: <1156985147.5900.24.camel@phandaal> References: <20060830172203.GA31824@mazirian.com> <20060830203912.GD31824@mazirian.com> <1156978907.12723.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1156985147.5900.24.camel@phandaal> Message-ID: <1156995472.16235.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Wed, 2006-08-30 at 20:45 -0400, Bradford R. Bowman wrote: > Mental, thanks for steering me straight. The updated source works. I > noted, however, that line 7 of share/default-blog.apache-cgi.patch > seems to have reverted. It needs to be as follows for comments to work > at all: > > RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-f Seems intact in trunk -- maybe your working copy has local changes somehow? ('svn revert' in that case can be used to restore the version from trunk) > Also, for someone using hobix as I described earlier in this thread, > there are two other places, both in lib/hobix/comments.rb, that > similar problems will arise. Done, I think... give it a try. -mental -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 191 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part Url : http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/hobix-is-the-way/attachments/20060830/6cc08d41/attachment.bin