Integration with "Scaffolding" Plugin
The heavy use of RY quickly calls for using templates to allow setting up pages with consistent structure. The built-in template mechanism of Confluence is limited to the time of page-creation without means to keep existing pages consistent. A very powerful plugin that allows live-templates is
Unfortunately, using RY in combination with Scaffolding currently leads to a rather rough workflow and reveals a number of bugs.
What would be most valuable, is an official statement to which degree the combination of these plugins is tested and supported.
Excellent news! Knowing this, I will give it another careful try and let you know in detail if I encounter problems.
I confirm, Requirement Yogi will support Scaffolding's live templates in the next release. Please tell me if you see any other bug than the one above (Live Template + Text Data macro).
Here is the "official list": https://documentation.play-sql.com/display/RY/Integration+with+other+add-ons
I'm on it, I'm studying what is possible, and if possible I'll confirm it in the next version. For the moment, as you said, there are a few glitches.
Sorry about previous comment, that was rather confusing.
The main use case is indeed to have a template that defines a table with the columns of a requirement definition and using this as live-template in multiple places. First column ("key") contains a "Text Data" and should be used to insert a RY macro via the "Edit Contents" mode of Scaffolding. The other columns should contain more Scaffolding placeholder macros so additional content can be added and edited via "Edit Contents"
After lots of experimenting, I the use case "kind-of" works, but the whole system is so fragile that I don't really trust the combination for production setup.
If you say that the combination RY/Scaffolding works well enough for you that you intend to support it, I would continue exploring it and try to submit detailed bug reports where I find problems.
If I understand, this ticket is both about support for Scaffolding and about what happens with duplicate definitions of requirements.
There are a few restrictions in place to avoid users ending up in a situation where requirements are defined twice. However, it could always happen. In that case, you just need to reindex the requirements of the page where the original requirement was (edit, modify something, save again) and voilà, the information is clean again. It seems to me that it's illogical to have a requirement definition in a template. Is there a use for that? Maybe I should just prevent requirement definitions in templates at a global level, to ensure that doesn't happen.
Concerning Scaffolding, I've just tried a live template with a "Text Data" (rich text mode) and it's true that it doesn't save the new version of the requirement when editing the values. Is this your main usecase or is there anything else obvious that I've missed with Scaffolding?