On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 7:12 AM, Mark Clements (HappyDog)
<[email protected]> wrote:
> "Sergey Chernyshev" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> There is probably a solution that can be done within the code - something
>> that makes all included PHP files override the version if it's later then
>> in
>> main file - something like this in main file:
>>
> [Code snipped]
>
> This is basically what I do in my WikiDB extension [1].  There is a
> WikiDB_RegisterRevision() function, and all files in the extension call this
> function using WikiDB_RegisterRevision('$Rev: 114 $'), where the 114 will be
> automatically substituted using svn:keyword expansion.  Check the files [2]
> to see it in situ.
>
> [1] http://www.kennel17.co.uk/testwiki/WikiDB
> [2] http://www.kennel17.co.uk/testwiki/WikiDB/Files
>
>>
>> Still, it's only a convention and not a universal solution, more over
>> it'll
>> only work if revision updated at least one PHP file. Also if extension
>> doesn't include all it's files or uses AutoLoader, then it will not be
>> reliable.
>
> All true.  In my case, I don't use auto-loading, all files are loaded on
> startup and I do not have any non-PHP files, so it works for me.  However
> this is far from best practice and won't give terribly good performance on
> busy wikis, I suspect.
>
> Perhaps we should add a "GetCredits" hook, to be called on Special:Version
> in order to get the credits info for the extension?  If the hook is not
> found, or returns false, then the info in $wgExtensionCredits for that
> extension is used, otherwise the array returned from the function (which is
> in th same format) will be used instead.  This would mean that the extension
> could use this function to include() all available files in order to get the
> revision number, but wouldn't need to include them on normal pages (thus
> avoiding the performance hit).  Wouldn't solve the problem of non-PHP files
> being updated, but would solve the rest.
>
> - Mark Clements (HappyDog).
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>

Not sure it's worth it :-\ What's wrong with just giving version numbers
that make sense, rather than relying on the revision number which isn't
indicative of anything?

-Chad

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Reply via email to