On Apr 19, 2004, at 10:04, Gabriel Wicke wrote:
> Modified Files:
> Parser.php
> Log Message:
> allow del and ins, other xhtml tags might be worth to allow as well
> (acronym and similar)
I was under the impression we were trying to reduce, not increase, the
amount of arbitrary HTML.
-- brion @ pobox.com)
So, one tool I've found very useful with MediaWiki is cvs2cl:
http://www.red-bean.com/cvs2cl/
There's a Debian package, too ("cvs2cl"). This tool parses CVS log
output to a nicely-formatted ChangeLog file.
It might actually be useful to ship the generated changelogs with
MediaWiki releases.
~ESP
--
Evan Prodromou <evan(a)wikitravel.org>
Wikitravel - http://www.wikitravel.org/
The free, complete, up-to-date and reliable world-wide travel guide
To direct people to something helpful while the database is offline for
duplication, I've added a link to try to load the requested page from
the Wayback Machine at www.archive.org.
To my surprise, it seems that we haven't gotten indexed by then since
mid-2003! So... it's a little dated. :(
It's possible that something in our robots.txt or user-agent checking
is keeping them away, but I'm not sure what. I'll look into it...
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
Hello,
On cvs, could it be possible to get wikihero out of the phase3 module and
release it under an "extension" module ?
The ~1000 images takes time to analyze and slow down a bit the process of
updating the cvs local copy.
That extensions also take close to 16MB of space on my hard disk (due to
cluster size) for an option I am not interested in ! Maybe we could release
it under it's on file category like "extensions" ?
cheers,
--
Ashar Voultoiz
http://fr.wikipedia.org/Utilisateur:Hashar
Now that coronelli's back online, curly (the server Bomis loaned to
cover coronelli's squid job briefly) will serve as a MySQL slave until
the New Server to be ordered gets here.
We'll have to take the database offline for about 2 hours to make a
clean transfer, but once up this will protect us against potentially
much worse outages in the case of hardware or software failure on suda.
The transfer is currently scheduled for midnight UTC Sunday
night/Monday morning (5pm PDT, 8pm EDT, 2 AM CEST). Make sure this is
known...
The database will be _offline completely_. Squid should still push out
cached pages to random visitors during this time.
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
<<
The differences seem compelling in favor of Fedora Core:
1. Fedora Core is free-beer, price of $0, whereas SUSE is $767.
2. Fedora Core is GNU-free, whereas I'm not so sure about SUSE.
>>
SuSE is GNU-free starting with 9.1 (the installation tool YaST is GPL in this release),
the professional edition is $90 and should work on AMD64 (kernel 2.6), the
release has gone gold and should start shipping end of April.
Fedora Core 2 is release is planned for May 17th, kernel 2.6 with SELinux
on which needs lots of fixing to get right (progressing nicely though), test3 beta
will be released on April 26th.
Fecora Core 1 is 2.4 based and I believe users of AMD64 are happy with it.
I don't know about debian and mandrake.
I've no AMD64 system yet, but since I just did a review of
the Linux state sharing some information would make sense :).
FC1 looks like the distribution to try first with
an update at end of may to a newer distribution if needed
(2.6 is reported as sometimes much faster on servers than 2.4).
Hope this helps,
Laurent
Hi,
I've installed the newest MediaWiki release (1.2.4) on a server here at
college. It was previously running an older version, but someone
accidentally deleted it, so I had to reinstall it.
I'm getting this error in the server log:
[Thu Apr 15 13:35:51 2004] [error] [client 131.111.193.146] malformed
header from script. Bad header=HTTP/1.1 301 Moved Permanently:
/usr/lib/cgi-bin/srcf-php-handler
and, of course, the browser displays the "Internal Server Error"
message. I'm getting the same when the script tries to return a "304 Not
Modified".
The server is running PHP 4.1.2 and MySQL 3.23.49. I don't know how to
find out the version of Apache; if you need it, please let me know.
Thanks for any help,
Timwi
I've been looking at a few things trying to improve the debugging
experience...
Zend Studio: http://www.zend.com/store/products/zend-studio.php
Commercial IDE from the people who write PHP. No-cost 21-day trial,
available as personal-use crippleware after the trial expires. I don't
like the editor, but it does "real" debugging (breakpoints,
single-step, examine variables and the callstack etc). It can run
scripts via the CGI interface, or in theory hook up to a web server,
though I haven't figured out how to get that running.
I've found debugging in Zend Studio to be a lot easier to work with
than sticking in a hojillion extra debug assertions, even in the local
CGI mode. It has a "Profile URL..." command for the remote debugging,
but I haven't found a local profiling option. The online help is vague.
Advanced PHP debugger: http://pecl.php.net/package/apd
Open source (PHP license). More of a profiler than a debugger, it
seems. May be more thorough than our current stack of
wfProfileIn()/wfProfileOut() calls...
I had some trouble installing it on my mac (had to change the
permissions to writable and run 'glibtoolize' manually between phpize
and configure). Quick demo output at
http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/Profiling
DBG: http://dd.cron.ru/dbg/
The website for this confuses me utterly. It appears to be a debugging
module for PHP, which is either open source or some versions of it are
open source but not others, and there's a commercial IDE that it hooks
into and maybe you can use it without it too. Perhaps worth checking
out.
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
Fedora Core 1 for AMD64 has been released, should I go with that on
the new db server, or SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 8 for AMD64?
The differences seem compelling in favor of Fedora Core:
1. Fedora Core is free-beer, price of $0, whereas SUSE is $767.
2. Fedora Core is GNU-free, whereas I'm not so sure about SUSE.
The possisble downside of Fedora Core for AMD64 is that it's more or
less "hot off the presses" as of March 5. (Over a month ago, so I
guess if it was a disaster we would have heard by now?)
--Jimbo
On Apr 15, 2004, at 09:06, Gabriel Wicke wrote:
> div again, we don't really know what will be inside the center tags.
> Could be another div for example, or a table.
In my experience, <div style="text-align:center"> and <center> don't do
the same thing. Mozilla's standard stylesheet uses a custom -moz-center
setting to achieve the <center> rendering.
Demonstration: http://leuksman.com/misc/div-center.html
The <div> inside the <center> block is centered in its parent's content
area, but the <div> inside the <div style="text-align:center"> block
actually shows up left aligned (though the text inside it is centered).
Mozilla's default stylesheet uses a custom "text-align: -moz-center" to
achieve <center> rendering, which makes me think there's just no good
way to emulate it completely with CSS2.
Anyway, while <center> is forbidden in XHTML 1.0 Strict, it's *not*
forbidden by XHTML 1.0 Transitional. Might be better to leave the
<center>s as they are for now.
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)