[pmwiki-users] New features to be enabled in the PmWiki core

[Petko Yotov]

On 30/08/2019 00:03, Neil Herber (nospam) wrote:
> I have several fields in my PMwiki farm and I REALLY appreciate how
> upgrades from one version to the next never seem to break anything. So

This the PmWiki philosophy #5.


> some of the recipes I use may have been replaced by core features and I
> just don't realize it. That said, my farm cookbook folder contains:
> 
> - analyze (site analyzer)

This, as well as RecipeCheck, could be integrated into scripts/diag.php, 
disabled by default until an admin specifically enables these (not just 
$EnableDiag).

> - commentboxplus

I use PmForm since Pm wrote it, but it may appear complex to configure 
at first. For now I don't plan to add it into the core distribution.

> - filelist

This is like the (:attachlist:) core feature but with a table instead of 
a bulleted list. I plan to add something like this, but more like the 
Attachtable recipe for basic file management (rename/delete/restore 
attachments).

> - mini

This is a picture gallery that I also use a lot, but most of my wikis 
are about art or architecture, so my experience is biased. I cannot 
estimate how many people would need this.

Moreover, it introduces new wiki markups and people need to decide about 
their uploads directory structure before doing galleries.

For the moment I prefer to leave this as a recipe.

> - phpmerge (IIRC, used because I don't have an external diff3 to detect
> simultaneous edits)

This one is quite complex and I haven't had the chance to review it 
thoroughly -- I prefer to keep it as an addon. BTW the major part of the 
code is a PHP class by an author other than Pm or me.

> - my-actionlog (actionlog customized to NOT log LAN hosts)
> - redirectmap
> -VisitorsLogging

I don't plan to add these at this point.

Petko

> On 2019-08-29 3:59 PM, Petko Yotov wrote:
>> Tell me what you think. What recipes/addons do you install on your
>> wikis (especially if you have installed multiple wikis)?
>> 
>> I am interested in features you and your editors actually use, not
>> "might be nice", and that do help editors create better content with
>> less effort.