I see what you are saying. But look at it this way: I create a page
with content "one", edit it to "two" and then edit it again to
"three". Here is my basic output on the undo page
Current Version: 02/27/09 18:50:45
Changed line 1:
two
to
three
Version: 02/27/09 10:50:43
Changed line 1:
one
to
two
RESTORE
Version: 02/27/09 10:50:36
Added line 1:
one
RESTORE
If I click the first RESTORE button I'm going back in time to when I
had just changed one to "two" (my last changes before changing two to
three. Click the button, and you get "two". Just what it says.
Click the second button and I go back to the time when I added the
word "one", and that's what I get. We're not undoing the changes but
going back in time to when those changes were made. (Why it says
RESTORE and not UNDO)
I'd prefer the behavior you want, but it is not so easy to do, as some
how each template iteration would have to show one stamp's diff and
then connect the RESTORE button to the next page. And then what would
we do with the very first changes? Would undo delete the page? It
might be interesting to have a {+prev} and {+next} var temporarily
assigned when displaying templates. That shouldn't be too hard to work
in...
Anyway, it's not impossible, but I think it would muck up the markup,
and I've gotten used to it this way. Seems cleaner to me somehow... If
the problem is the word UNDO, we could change it. Perhaps REVERT is
better as we have a restore command that deals with installing plugin
backups.
We can see what others say, if any care to chime in as well...
Cheers,
Dan
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"BoltWire" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/boltwire?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
