Bug #57870

forge should output a meaningful description-metatag

Added by Stefan Neufeind over 5 years ago. Updated 2 months ago.

Status:
Closed
Priority:
Should have
Assignee:
-
Category:
-
Target version:
-
Start date:
2014-04-13
Due date:
% Done:

0%

Estimated time:
8.00 h

Description

Currently the description is "Redmine". When posting a link to Slack or so that's also the only thing that gets shown as an annotation to the link. It might be useful to have the issue-description in there, maybe just like the title-tag. Or maybe Slack would even pull title instead of no description-metatag were given at all.

History

#1 Updated by Michael Stucki over 5 years ago

  • Assignee set to Peter Niederlag

Ah! I was always wondering why the links contain this stupid message. Makes much sense of course.

Peter, can you add this?

#2 Updated by Stefan Neufeind over 5 years ago

Bastian suggested to wait a bit until the Redmine-update that will be done "shortly" :-)

#3 Updated by Peter Niederlag over 4 years ago

  • Estimated time set to 8.00 h

Even current upstream redmine just handles it this way. My first suggestion would be to fix slack and tell it to use the title tag instead of the description tag.

Other options are to check the plugin meta http://www.redmine.org/plugins/meta which claims to work for 1.4.x and 2.x series or implement a propoer custom plugin.

#4 Updated by Christian Weiske over 4 years ago

I already asked slack support for help and they will not change their implementation - https://typo3.slack.com/help/requests/490360

We use the oEmbed, Open Graph, or Twitter card information from the website itself to show the preview. It looks like the metadata on the https://forge.typo3.org/ site isn't quite set up with the data for us to pull from.

If the site adds oEmbed, Open Graph or Twitter card support, then we should be able to pull a better preview for the page.

#5 Updated by Bastian Bringenberg over 2 years ago

  • Assignee changed from Peter Niederlag to Michael Stucki

Please forward this aswell.

#6 Updated by Steffen Gebert over 2 years ago

This is what the Meta plugin is for.

While not officially supported, it works on Redmine 3.3. I've followed the author's plugin a while ago and the look very good. I've created a Git mirror here: https://github.com/StephenKing/rm_meta

Do we want to include that plugin?

#7 Updated by Steffen Gebert over 2 years ago

  • Status changed from New to Under Review

This is what the Meta plugin is for.

While not officially supported, it works on Redmine 3.3. I've followed the author's plugin a while ago and the look very good. I've created a Git mirror here: https://github.com/StephenKing/rm_meta

Do we want to include that plugin?

#8 Updated by Stefan Neufeind over 2 years ago

Sounds promising. I'm just not sure if we should also include (activate?) the beautiful-url-part, since I expect that might cause trouble when we want/need to disable the plugin later on some day? So just the additional meta-data etc. for now?

#9 Updated by Michael Stucki over 2 years ago

Prove me wrong but I don't like it. Too many overrides for such a simple change. I guess it's because the plugin does more than what we need...
Also I'm not happy about plugins that duplicate complete views like layouts/base.html.erb. Since we already do that in our own typo3_forge plugin, I assume that it will conflict with this.

In my opinion, a change like this should either be integrated into the typo3_base plugin, or we patch it directly in Redmine. Also, because this looks like a useful feature to me, we should submit the change to upstream...

#10 Updated by Steffen Gebert over 2 years ago

I see. We might really run into trouble with the duplicated base view. But to just take the code over into our typo3_forge plugin, it's a bit too much code, isn't it?

Having better meta data would still be very nice - including links in Slack is really PITA. A shame that Redmine itself doesn't provide better data.

Should we ask Sascha regarding his opinion, if we fork the plugin and drop the duplicated view?

#11 Updated by Michael Stucki over 2 years ago

  • Status changed from Under Review to Accepted

I will do that!

#12 Updated by Steffen Gebert about 2 years ago

  • Status changed from Accepted to New

#13 Updated by Michael Stucki 10 months ago

  • Assignee deleted (Michael Stucki)

#14 Updated by Bastian Bringenberg 2 months ago

  • Status changed from New to Closed

will not do

Also available in: Atom PDF