The Skyttä Patches (was: checklink: -l?; get relative)

Ville Skyttä <ville.skytta@iki.fi> wrote:

>patches for validator and checklink can be found at
>http://koti.welho.com/vskytta/patches/w3c-validator/

Speaking of which, I finally got around to looking at these again. A few
comments...

* base-css.patch
- Applied (apart from the style for "label" that I forgot,
  but will be in the next checkin).
- The styling for "pre" was deliberately disabled due to some
  wonkyness with rendering in Gecko, but I reenabled it so we
  can fix the problem instead of the symptom.

* check-cfg.patch:
- Applied and expanded on.

* check-html.patch:
- Applied.
- Some of it was obsoleted by some other work, but
  the rest was applied pretty much as is.

* check-mismatches.patch:
- NOT applied!
- I nuked the insane number of checks for charset mismatches
  deliberately a while back to encourage myself to find a real
  solution to the problem.
- I did however add back in a few checks to avoid the worst of
  the meaningless warnings in output.

* check-paths.patch:
- NOT applied!
- Portability is the furthest from my mind ATM. Maybe I'll
  revisit it before 0.7.0 goes final; I certainly will before
  1.0 (if /that/ ever happens). :-)

* check-protocols.patch:
- Applied.
- Also led to some infrastructure work that was much needed.
  I reworked your patch slightly to fit into this new scheme.

* check-untaint.patch:
- Partially applied.
- Some of it assumes we're running under mod_perl (which we don't!),
  some of it I don't understand the reason for, and some of it I'd
  solve in a different way.
- I'm going to revisit this one when I feel up to fighting with
  mod_perl again. :-(
- Untainting config parameters should be done in &read_cfg if it
  should be done at all.

* typos.patch:
- Applied, thanks for the catch! :-)


Again, thanks for taking the time to do this Ville; it's _very_ much
appreciated!


I'm getting somewhat closer to a stable point so expect a 0.7.0a2 tag to
appear in CVS some time soon. It should be stable enough to actually run
this time -- :-) -- which means I'll probably update :8001 with that
version when it's ready.


-- 
These are the same customers you are referring to whom Microsoft thought
would need MS Bob and the Talking Paperclip?   One thing is to give them
enough rope to hang themselves,  but a boobytrapped thermonuclear weapon
running on a rand(time) countdown... Is that really wise? - Me to MS rep.

Received on Saturday, 30 March 2002 02:44:57 UTC