Re: [Pyblosxom-devel] Patch for pagination in static-rendering mode

[will kahn-g. <wi...@bl...>]

I don't think it should be in the core. It's less an issue of "who 
would never use pagination" and more an issue of "are there different 
kinds of pagination behavior and thus should be supported in plugins". 
So I'm -1 on adding this to the core.

I'll toss this and the patch into the issue tracker at some point and 
someone can look at absorbing the changes into the pagination plugin.

/will


On Fri 16 Mar 2012 05:03:34 AM EDT, Norman Yarvin wrote:
> Attached is a patch that enables pagination in static-rendering mode,
> pagination being the rendering of index pages which are longer than
> num_entries by writing them out to multiple pages, combined with the
> production of navigation strings which the user can include in the
> templates for those pages.  Since:
>
> 	-- doing this as a plugin seemed somewhere between painful and
> 	impossible, and
>
> 	-- I think this really should be core functionality anyway,
>
> I went ahead and implemented the whole thing in the core.  It should work
> for dynamic rendering, too (or whatever one calls the opposite of static
> rendering), but I haven't tested that mode.  It is meant to supersede the
> present "paginate" plugin, but the latter should still work (again,
> untested).  It uses all the same config variables, except for
> "paginate_count_from", which I thought was far too much in the
> bikeshedding direction to be worth saving.  The variable
> "paginate_linkstyle" accepts, besides the old settings (0 or 1), the more
> descriptive settings "1 of 4" (same as style 1) or "1234" (same as style 0).
>
> For static rendering, instead of the page number being sent in the HTML
> query, as in
>
> 	http://example.com/blog/index.html?page=2
>
> it has to be part of the filename, as in
>
> 	http://example.com/blog/index_page2.html
>
> which is now this change does it.
>
> I haven't yet fixed up the documentation to reflect the changes.
>
> (As for why I think this should be core functionality, I can't imagine
> anyone not wanting it, at least for normal weblog use.)
>
>
>
>
>
> This body part will be downloaded on demand.
>
>
> This body part will be downloaded on demand.