r79941 MediaWiki - Code Review archive

Repository:MediaWiki
Revision:< r79940‎ | r79941 | r79942 >
Date:17:18, 10 January 2011
Author:hartman
Status:resolved (Comments)
Tags:
Comment:
Follow up to r79905. Disabling resource inclusion of LQT api. Don't know how to fix this properly, seems undocumented for Resourceloader.
Modified paths:
  • /trunk/extensions/LiquidThreads/api/ApiThreadAction.php (modified) (history)

Diff [purge]

Index: trunk/extensions/LiquidThreads/api/ApiThreadAction.php
——@@ -786,8 +786,10 @@
787787
788788 $result = array( 'inlineeditform' => array( 'html' => $output ) );
789789
 790+ /* FIXME
790791 $result['resources'] = LqtView::getJSandCSS();
791792 $result['resources']['messages'] = LqtView::exportJSLocalisation();
 793+ */
792794
793795 $this->getResult()->addValue( null, 'threadaction', $result );
794796 }

Follow-up revisions

RevisionCommit summaryAuthorDate
r95631Follow up to r79941...hartman17:41, 28 August 2011

Past revisions this follows-up on

RevisionCommit summaryAuthorDate
r79905Convert LQT to resource loader....hartman17:14, 9 January 2011

Comments

#Comment by Catrope (talk | contribs)   19:54, 12 January 2011

So fix this, or poke someone to fix it.

#Comment by TheDJ (talk | contribs)   20:47, 12 January 2011

I poked trevor, he had no idea.

#Comment by Catrope (talk | contribs)   20:51, 12 January 2011

We've agreed to talk about this during the WMNL hackathon on Jan 14.

#Comment by Brion VIBBER (talk | contribs)   22:17, 24 August 2011

Did you guys talk about it? What was the result?

#Comment by Catrope (talk | contribs)   12:35, 25 August 2011

Apparently the inline edit for needs extra JS/messages to be loaded. Previously, the JS URLs and messages were served in the API response, but now that everything is RLified the API response should just list module names that the client can then load. However, I'm not familiar enough with LQT to figure out which modules should be loaded here, so I can't fix this by myself.

#Comment by TheDJ (talk | contribs)   17:47, 28 August 2011

I concluded that there is no longer a good reason to put the resources in the api results. r95631

#Comment by Catrope (talk | contribs)   14:28, 31 August 2011

That addresses it, provided the misspelling in that rev is corrected and that it's tested. Setting this rev to resolved.

Status & tagging log