Matt Raible wrote:
On 3/14/07, Allen Gilliland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Matt Raible wrote:
> I downloaded and tried out rc6 - here's what I found.
>
> In WEB-INF/velocity/weblog.vm, there is the following entry in the
> showWeblogEntryComments macro.
>
> <a href="$url.comment($entry.anchor,
$comment.timestamp)"
> class="entrypermalink" title="$text.get(
> "macro.weblog.commentpermalink.title" )">#</a>
>
> However, there's no <a name="$comment.anchor"></a> to match this.
> That means # links are presented to the user, but nothing happens when
> you click on them.
I thought I had fixed that in the trunk a while ago, but in any case I
don't know that little things like this are big enough to keep causing
us to delay the release. At some point we have to accept the fact that
we can't fix everything in one release and just move on.
That's fine - but can you tell me how to fix it locally? I've used
these links quite a bit to refer to comments on my blog in the past.
Unfortunately, many of them are invalid since we changed from
comment${number} to comment${timestamp}
Sure, it's very easy. The links are being generated fine, the only
problem is that what they are linking to is not in the page by default.
So to fix that you just need to add this in the
#showWeblogEntryComments() macro ...
<a name="comment-$comment.timestamp" id="comment-$comment.timestamp"></a>
that way those links are actually pointing to something =)
You can just put it above the <div class="comment...> line
FWIW, this does seem to work on Jonathan's blog - don't know if he's
running the latest.
http://blogs.sun.com/jonathan/entry/moving_a_petabyte_of_data#comment-1173770951000
yep, that's because we are running newer versions of Roller than what's
been released. the release process has really slowed us down and 3.1
release is a ways behind what is in the trunk :(
-- Allen
Matt
>
> Also, I noticed that rc3 had:
>
> create table roller_tasklock (
> id varchar(48) not null primary key,
> name varchar(255) not null,
> islocked tinyint(1) default 0,
> timeacquired datetime NULL,
> timeleased integer,
> lastrun datetime NULL
> );
> create index rtl_taskname_idx on roller_tasklock( name );
>
> Whereas rc6 has:
>
> create table roller_tasklock (
> id varchar(48) not null primary key,
> name varchar(255) not null,
> islocked tinyint(1) default 0,
> timeacquired datetime NULL,
> timeleased integer,
> lastrun datetime NULL
> );
> alter table roller_tasklock add constraint rtl_name_uq unique (
name(40) );
>
> In other words, the older version had "create index" and the latest
> has "alter table". Do I need to make this change to my database, or
> is the change from rc3 sufficient?
no, those do totally different things and you need the constraint that
comes with the new table definition and can discard the old index.
Nothing to say about that really, that's just what happens when you are
using pre-final code :/
it should be easy to fix though ...
drop index rtl_taskname_idx from roller_tasklock;
alter table roller_tasklock add constraint rtl_name_uq unique (
name(40) );
-- Allen
>
> Thanks,
>
> Matt
>
> On 3/14/07, Dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Jon Stevens downloaded RC5, tested and found a couple of bugs in the
>> new File Upload sub-folder feature, so I fixed that and couple of
>> footer links.
>>
>> Now we have RC6
>> http://people.apache.org/~snoopdave/apache-roller-3.1/
>>
>> And the updated change list here
>> https://roller.dev.java.net/servlets/ProjectDocumentList?folderID=6962
>>
>> Download, test and please VOTE!
>>
>> - Dave
>>
>
>
