{{gitpr|####}} for Wiki

[Major Cooke]

When new features are added, sometimes they are with multiple commits to the github which makes it inconvenient to see the files as a whole and what all the changes entail. So I'd like to recommend a {{gitpr|####}} that says something indicates similar to what {{git|SHA}} does to indicate it's only available as of the time of its merging.

[Rachael]

I think it would be wise to leave this open for discussion, as I am not sure how many people really want features not yet available in the devbuilds to be documented alongside usable stuff, I'd like to see how many people would be in favor or opposed to that.

[Major Cooke]

The reason to document them sooner than later is because I, for example, have a notorious memory. After a while I can forget what certain things do when I make a submission so it's far better to document it well ahead of time.

Not to mention people excited to use them can have the features available sooner with documentation so they can start screwing around with it. We've been doing this for many years after all. This is what we did with ZScript in its entirety and every new features, we just slap a {{git|SHA}} onto it and then people can get a devbuild when its ready and start checking it out.

Also this would only apply to PRs that actually do merge into GZDoom.

[Rachael]

Ah, I see, good point then.

https://zdoom.org/wiki/Template_talk:Gitpr

I am sure that could be improved, but there's a start. I don't use MediaWiki much.

[Blue Shadow]

I personally don't think this is really necessary; GitHub shows what PR a commit comes from, if any.

lajdflajfla.png

When tagging a feature on the wiki, you can use the merge commit hash located at the bottom of the PR page. The only little problem is that the git template doesn't link directly to GitHub. It instead links to the changelog page on the ZDoom site. This can be solved easily by updating the template, however.

Another thing is that not every feature that spans multiple commit would have an associated PR.

[Major Cooke]

...Why do they have to make that so difficult to see on github?

But that actually does sound like a good idea too. Had I known/remembered that was a thing I would've started off in that direction as well instead.

[phantombeta]

I feel like linking it to a PR number would be more reliable than linking to a commit ID. PRs can have more things committed to them or even be force pushed (in which case the original commit will even be deleted entirely from Github!), which would cause issues with something based on commit hashes, whereas the PR ID won't change.

[Rachael]

PR's can also show multiple commits, and a lot of them get merged as-is that way. So it still can be useful.

Nevertheless, it's there. If it's an unwelcome addition, there's a lot of wiki admins that can simply erase it from existence, I won't lose sleep if it has to go away. Ultimately I hope it will be helpful.

[Major Cooke]

Yeah, I'm still going to use it no matter what.