Post abstracts

[MattDrivenDev]

At the moment post abstracts are require to be in related abstracts folders.

Was there much motivation behind this originally, beyond getting it working?

I rather like instead what Octopress does, using a <!-- more --> code segment (perhaps we use (*** more ***) in the .fsx posts). Abstracts are then optional as well and we should have a smaller footprint.

Any opinions?

[7sharp9]

Octopress style was pretty initiative, mutsh like the image tag is too.

On 3 Nov 2013, at 23:43, Matt Ball notifications@github.com wrote:

At the moment post abstracts are require to be in related abstracts folders.

Was there much motivation behind this originally, beyond getting it working?

I rather like instead what Octopress does, using a code segment (perhaps we use (*** more ***) in the .fsx posts). Abstracts are then optional as well and we should have a smaller footprint.

Any opinions?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

[MattDrivenDev]

Yeah you're right, Dave.

I think it's pretty much the obvious thing to do - I was just wondering what the original intention was.

[tpetricek]

There was not much thinking behind this beyond getting it working easily :-).

Something like <!-- more --> or (*** more ***) sounds good (though I occasionally have a little different text in my abstracts - but I don't think that's needed - also, I had those separate in my old blog, so perhaps that's why I did this). I think getting rid of abstracts would be great.

The abstracts are needed when loading information about all blog posts (to generate index etc.) so the generated abstracts are also stored in a cached subfolder somewhere (but this could equally be done if they were a part of article).

[MattDrivenDev]

Thanks for commenting guys! 👍

I'll go forwards as discussed. I like the idea of being able to override the abstract with a completely different text - but I'll leave that out of scope for the now and just roll with what is easiest/quickest to use.