This section is used by the Cabal in plotting improvements
to the inner workings of the Monastery's raw sewage macerator,
boiler room, nuclear reactor, and cold fusion pump.
Cabal only may post root nodes to this section.
But fresh thought often spawns progress, so any Perl Monk
may add comments to existing discussion threads within
this section.
Please remember that Monastery related discussions of global
interest to the general PerlMonks population should be
entertained in the Perl Monks Discussion section.
gods can and will remove off-topic content from the Inner Scriptorium.
Here is my basic plan to implement an optional WYSIWYG editor for posting. The idea is to give monks the option (default: off) of using a graphical JavaScript editor for making new posts. In my opinion, this could be especially helpful in SoPW for inexperienced users.
The idea is to use CKEditor 4 (or rather, a slightly modified version to fit Perl Monks Approved HTML tags). CKEditor 4 is ideal for this, because it just lays on top of the existing HTML textarea field and can be persuaded to update the textarea field whenever the form is posted. It also allows to edit the HTML directly ("View Source" button). Since this is an experimental feature that requires JavaScript, i propose that this overlay will only be active when all of the following conditions are true:
The user has selected HTML as the prefered markup language in user settings
The user has forced preview active in user settings
The user has enabled the "Experimental WYSIWYG" editor in user settings
This would translate to a pseudo-code like this:
# while generating the <head> part
if($usersettings[markuptype] eq 'html' &&
!$usersettings[disable_forced_preview] &&
$usersettings[graphical_content_editor]) {
# external JS file also includes some form of "document.addEventLi
+stener("DOMContentLoaded", function(event) {"
# to initialize the editor after the browser has finished loading
+everything.
# This way it should not conflict with content security policy
$html .= '<script type="text/javascript" src="/static/ckeditor_per
+lmonks.js"></script>';
}
As this editor is completely optional and off by default, nothing should change for users, except if they go into their settings and enable it. Even if it is enabled, if the users browser has JavaScript disabled/blocked, the form would just silently and automatically fall back to the classic "edit HTML by hand" textarea. This is because the Editor doesn't replace the textarea in the HTML form, it just runs on top of it.
perl -e 'use Crypt::Digest::SHA256 qw[sha256_hex]; print substr(sha256_hex("the Answer To Life, The Universe And Everything"), 6, 2), "\n";'
ok so we have a new feature: usergroup-private discussion threads. I've been thinking we should have this for quite a long time. Currently we use wikis for intra-group discussion, and it's really very sub-ideal. (I first floated this idea in Create new [pmdev]-only section "Pmdev Discussion". That was much more generic and open-ended, but this solution meets the immediate need.)
If you're a member of any cabal groups, try going to one of your group pages (janitors, pmdev, etc.) and see what's at the bottom.
If you're in pmdev, you can see a technical description of the implementation by visiting the new nodetype usergroupnote; scroll to the bottom to the documentation.
Question: Is this a good feature? Should we publish it, or roll back the change?
TIA for your thoughts.
I reckon we are the only monastery ever to have a dungeon stuffed with 16,000 zombies.
The PM-Dev nodelet has a link Show Containers which seems to be broken.
It will always show stdcontainer and nothing else, I suppose the intention was to show the whole hierarchy.
I couldn't identify the responsible code, I had some grep matches in the everything library.
FWIW: there is a poor man's workaround, click on "display page" and click thru the "parent container:" links.
Cheers Rolf (addicted to the Perl Programming Language and ☆☆☆☆ :)
Je suis Charlie!
One of the things that people have said we ought to have is a mobile version of the site. I agree. :-) So to get development started, I have set up a small framework for the developers to work on. There are three infrastructure nodes which any pmdev members can submit patches to:
Hopefully someday we can make the necessary DNS changes to allow the mobile site to be accessed at m.perlmonks.org.
We need people who are good with CSS and Javascript. :-)
If you'd like to help, and are not yet a member of pmdev, you may message the gods to ask to be added.
Update:
In order to support expedited development of the CSS and JS bits, I have set up a wonki, mobile css and javascript, which contains the CSS and JS used by the mobile site.
This is temporary; when the CSS and JS have stabilized, I'll move their respective code into the fullpages linked above.
If you would like to try hacking on the CSS and/or JS, let me know and I'll add you to the wonki. But I want to keep the number of writers small, to minimize collisions. Wonkis work like wikis. :-)
I reckon we are the only monastery ever to have a dungeon stuffed with 16,000 zombies.
Inspired by the thread voting does update, I have made a change -- experimental at this point -- to test the viability and desirability of separating the edit your post capability out of the normal threaded view; the vote on posts capability would remain in the normal threaded view as it is.
To check it out, find and view a root post of yours in the Obfu section.
(You can find a list (if you have any) here.)
Currently this change is only in effect for that specific scenario: root Obfu posts.
You'll see two differences:
The textarea labeled "Your obfuscated code", where you could edit the content, is gone;
There is now an "Edit" link above your post, on the far right side.
If you click on that 'Edit' link, you'll be taken to a page which, like original post/preview pages, allows you to edit your post but does not show you the rest of the thread, nor to vote on posts in the thread.
Note: janitors (and other authorized members) will see this 'Edit' link on any post* to which they have edit permissions, not just ones they own.
* Currently only Obfu root posts, as I said above.
I think this change, if adopted across the board, would have the desirable side-effect of suppressing, however slightly, the tendency of monks to edit their posts later. What are your thoughts?
I reckon we are the only monastery ever to have a dungeon stuffed with 16,000 zombies.
a google search for another monk led me to a profile page saying he hasn't been here for more than 7 years!?!
After investigating the URL (which I hesitate to disclosure here) I realized that this must be a development version of the monastery accessing an old DB instance.
Changing the topdomain produced different results, sometimes I had to change index.pl to index.cgi, sometimes I was able to read the scripts source, sometimes got just 404s for links which worked before and vice versa.
Not sure if this might be related to my privileges ...
I think either this has to be taken offline or password protected, in any case it shouldn't be indexed by google.
Cheers Rolf (addicted to the Perl Programming Language and ☆☆☆☆ :)
Je suis Charlie!
update
this post was initially written for PMD, till I found this pmdevtopic board.
I think it should be safe to post links here
links deleted ¹
if you are getting errors, please try to switch to .com or .net or change .pl to .cgi, it seems like different servers in the background react inconsistently.
update
¹) why is this branch called "inner scriptorium" but publicly readable? I deleted the links again, google didn't cache them yet.
There's been a fair amount of discussion lately about how to designate off-topic posts (i.e. whether to set up a separate section for them, or not). (I think a good place to start getting familiar with the subject is here.)
The implicit underpinning of these discussions is what "off topic" means at PerlMonks. Indeed, part of the difficulty in arriving at a solution of which a plurality of monks would approve is that "off topic" is not well defined, and seems to mean different things in different contexts. I am starting to think it might be a good idea, then, to establish definitions for the following:
What is so far off topic for PerlMonks that it simply won't be acceptable? A post that is beyond this pale would be reaped, or possibly moved to the offtopicroot "section". (Note: not a section.)
What is off-topic enough to warrant not being approved into a section?
What is off-topic enough to warrant being designated (labeled, binned, etc.) as "OT"?
And indeed, what is the relative "severity" of the latter two criteria?
These definitions would be documented for all to see, and in particular would be incorporated into the Janitors' Guidelines, as well as the moderation and consideration guidelines.
Question #1 is: Do we agree that having something written down would be a good idea? I get a vague feeling that the answer to this question, historically, was "No". But it could just be that we never got around to it...
I reckon we are the only monastery ever to have a dungeon stuffed with 16,000 zombies.
Is there a complete log of consideration events anywhere? By complete, I mean including the logging of events such as unconsideration. I don't know of any such; and what that means is that if a monk puts on a consideration, and then a janitor removes it, there is no trace of that consideration at all anywhere. Am I just missing something? Thanks...
I reckon we are the only monastery ever to have a dungeon stuffed with 16,000 zombies.
