Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Better TinyMCE code editor #1189

Open
MarskyMessier opened this issue Jan 12, 2025 · 4 comments · Fixed by #1198
Open

Better TinyMCE code editor #1189

MarskyMessier opened this issue Jan 12, 2025 · 4 comments · Fixed by #1198
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@MarskyMessier
Copy link

I feel like the current code editor on core is really lackluster to say the least, and messes up a lot of things (doesn't retain any stylization whatsoever, changes when going back to WYSIWYG etc.), I think Moif's extension http://wiki.lorekeeper.me/index.php?title=Extensions:TinyMCE_Code_Editor is a huge QoL upgrade on what we have already, and is small enough not to disrupt anything in core (and wouldn't break anything so I assume it could be merged in dev without issues, or with just minor tweaks?).

@itinerare itinerare added the enhancement New feature or request label Jan 12, 2025
@SpeedyD
Copy link
Contributor

SpeedyD commented Jan 12, 2025

Would require @AW0005's permission, but I have a feeling it wouldn't be too hard to get..

@AW0005
Copy link
Contributor

AW0005 commented Jan 12, 2025

Yea I don't mind at all

@MarskyMessier
Copy link
Author

Could this issue be closed or does the ext need more work on it?

@itinerare itinerare linked a pull request Feb 4, 2025 that will close this issue
@SpeedyD
Copy link
Contributor

SpeedyD commented Feb 4, 2025

It's fine. Itinerare linked the PR, so it'll close automatically once it hits main branch. :)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants