Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Refactor newpost (Fix #1943) #1944

Merged
merged 6 commits into from Aug 15, 2015
Merged

Refactor newpost (Fix #1943) #1944

merged 6 commits into from Aug 15, 2015

Conversation

ralsina
Copy link
Member

@ralsina ralsina commented Aug 15, 2015

There are some minor changes, in that more plugins are not loaded, so for them friendlyName is not available.

@Kwpolska
Copy link
Member

444-446 are old docs.

How does it look now, and could we patch in friendly names for the built-in compilers?

@ralsina
Copy link
Member Author

ralsina commented Aug 15, 2015

@Kwpolska we'd have to put friendly names in the plugin metadata, which makes sense. Or we could use description instead of friendlyName.

Looks like this:

Available input formats:

 NAME      DESCRIPTION       EXTENSIONS

 rest      reStructuredText  .rst, .txt
!html      html              .html, .htm
!ipynb     ipynb             .ipynb
!markdown  markdown          .md, .mdown, .markdown
!php       php               .php
~pandoc    pandoc            (disabled: not in COMPILERS)

    More compilers are available in the Plugins Index.

    Compilers marked with ! and ~ require additional configuration:
        ! not in the PAGES/POSTS tuples (unused)
        ~ not in the COMPILERS dict (disabled)
    Read more: https://getnikola.com/handbook.html#configuring-other-input-formats

@Kwpolska
Copy link
Member

Could you take care of this?

Chris Warrick https://chriswarrick.com/
Sent from my Galaxy S3.

On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 7:29 PM, Roberto Alsina notifications@github.com
wrote:

@Kwpolska we'd have to put friendly names in the plugin metadata, which makes sense.

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#1944 (comment)

@ralsina
Copy link
Member Author

ralsina commented Aug 15, 2015

@Kwpolska sure. Not right away because I am in the middle of a large refactor and don't want to look away too much :-)

ralsina added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 15, 2015
@ralsina
Merge pull request #1944 from getnikola/refactor_newpost
7e4c541 
Refactor newpost (Fix #1943)
@ralsina ralsina merged commit 7e4c541 into master Aug 15, 2015
@ralsina ralsina deleted the refactor_newpost branch August 15, 2015 19:27
FelixSchwarz pushed a commit to FelixSchwarz/nikola that referenced this pull request Apr 4, 2018
@felixfontein
Fixed little remarks by Kwpolska in getnikola#1944.
17c36a0
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
2 participants
@ralsina @Kwpolska