[ php-blog-Bugs-1461728 ] pubDate fluttering in RSS2.0 feeds

Bugs item #1461728, was opened at 2006-03-30 23:05
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by garvinhicking
You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=542822&aid=1461728&group_id=75065

Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread,
including the initial issue submission, for this request,
not just the latest update.
Category: Syndication Feeds
Group: None
>Status: Pending
>Resolution: Fixed
Priority: 1
Submitted By: John Goerzen (jgoerzen)
Assigned to: Garvin Hicking (garvinhicking)
Summary: pubDate fluttering in RSS2.0 feeds

Initial Comment:
I've noticed a good deal of strangeness in the behavior
of some syndicators that are pulling from my site. 
I've tracked the behavior down to the pubDate field.

In this report, I am talking about the main RSS 2.0
feed, not the one that lists comments; that is, the
feed you could find at
http://changelog.complete.org/feeds/index.rss2.

Serendipity is taking the pubDate field to mean "date
of last comment post" rather than "date of post of
article itself."  This is not really correct.

In fact, I verified this behavior.  I saved off a copy
of the feed, posted a copy, and saved off another copy.
 The diff is attached.

Now, as for why this is happening... I don't know.  The
article publishing date on the website for the blog
itself remains correct all the time.  Only the feed
seems to be impacted.

Just in case, I tried reverting my earlier patch for
the regex patch, and go to a more supported URL scheme,
but that made no difference.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

>Comment By: Garvin Hicking (garvinhicking)
Date: 2006-03-31 17:26

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=473563

Config option bug fixed in 1.0-beta and 1.1-alpha.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Garvin Hicking (garvinhicking)
Date: 2006-03-31 16:33

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=473563

Hi! Yes, thanks for reminding me about the config issue,
I'll fix that!

About the Planet thing:Yes, people like hds (Julian Finn,
AFAIR) on the IRC have also reported such planet problems,
but the last time we did track it down to a planet problem...

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: John Goerzen (jgoerzen)
Date: 2006-03-31 14:25

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=491567

Garvin, looks like you're right.  Disabling the pubDate
didn't help things.

I'll send a bug to the Planet folks.

I still think there is a legitimate bug here on the
configuration screen though.  (And I still think the pubDate
behavior is incorrect, but your reason for not changing it
makes good sense, especially since we know this is not
what's confusing Planet.)

BTW, it appears that others have seen this problem too:

http://changelog.complete.org/posts/468-Sorry-for-the-dupes.html#c42099


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Garvin Hicking (garvinhicking)
Date: 2006-03-31 08:33

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=473563

Hi!

The problem actually IS the slash:comment count. If we don't
push the pubDate element, RSS readers will not fetch the
latest feed, and thus will not recognize that the comment
count has increased. RSS Readers like RSS Bandit show
threaded comments for the plain RSS feed thanks to the
wfwComment and slash_comment elements. If they were not
updated, those readers would not see that there is a new
comment.

Sadly this handling was done a year ago, where I worked on
this about 1-2 weeks to get it to work with all sort of
diffreent RSS readers, online readers, Mac reader, Linux
readers, so I'm reluctant to change it to introduce borkage
on any of those readers...

Best regards,
Garvin

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: John Goerzen (jgoerzen)
Date: 2006-03-31 07:03

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=491567

Hi Garvin,

Thanks again for your attention.

I freely admit I have never even heard of WFW feeds
before...  so take this with a grain of salt.

I'm talking about a plain story feed, not a comment one. 
Besides that overall channel pubDate field, the only other
one that is being adjusted is slash:comment, which I
wouldn't think is related to WFW or merits a pubDate change.

The logic you describe makes good sense when we're talking
about a comment feed, and it probably the Right Thing there.
 The RSS 2.0 spec isn't terribly specific on this point, but
it seems to me that bumping the pubDate due to comments is
not the Right Thing for all the non-comment feeds.

I wonder if it would be possible to use the modified_date
for comment feeds and the timestamp for everything else?

As far as a conditional get goes, I again don't know this
for certain, but my understanding always was that HTTP
headers were used for this.  By the time you've emitted
enough XML to give a pubDate, it's probably too late to save
any work anyway.  But anyway, I can see why you could argue
for using last_modified for the HTTP header logic.  But I
think you could still use timestamp for the channel pubDate
and still be correct.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Garvin Hicking (garvinhicking)
Date: 2006-03-31 06:16

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=473563

This is intentional. It's called "Conditional Get" and is
required to update, so that comments to an entry showup in
the wfwComment Feed in RSS Readers.

You can disablethat updatingbehavior via a max_time config
option in the serendipity_config.inc.php file,but I do not
suggestthis, because it will make problems for userswith RSS
readers thatwant to get the latest comments to your latest
entries.

Thanks about that plugin reversion thing, I will look at that!

Regards,
Garvin

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: John Goerzen (jgoerzen)
Date: 2006-03-31 03:15

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=491567

One thing I missed when I looked at that diff was that the
pubDate field that is fluttering is the channel one and not
the story one.

But that makes it stranger, because in the plugin
configuration for the Syndication plugin, I had already set
the field "pubDate" to "No".  So it shouldn't even be
including a pubDate at the channel level -- only on the
story level.

Funny thing is -- if I go into that same config screen and
set the pubDate to Yes, then that per-channel pubDate is
ommitted.  So I think there is just a logic error someplace
that is swapping around this one.

So that's bug #1.

Bug #2 is that this item is coming from the last_modified
field instead of timestamp (as all the other pubDates for
items are coming from), on line 1000 of plugin_internal.inc.php.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=542822&aid=1461728&group_id=75065


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language
that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast
and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory!
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642