[Feature Request]: plug-in interface that makes external content appear to be a book with pages #2660

New Issue

OVERLORD · 2026-02-05T04:44:18+03:00

OVERLORD commented

2026-02-05 04:44:18 +03:00

Originally created by @craibuc on GitHub (Feb 22, 2022).

Describe the feature you'd like

I have an external, SQL-based, data-dictionary that I'd like to integrate with Bookstack. I'd want to map some aspects of the dictionary as pages, while other content would be the pages' contents.

Describe the benefits this feature would bring to BookStack users

This would allow others to extend the functionality of Bookstack.

Additional context

No response

Originally created by @craibuc on GitHub (Feb 22, 2022). ### Describe the feature you'd like I have an external, SQL-based, data-dictionary that I'd like to integrate with Bookstack. I'd want to map some aspects of the dictionary as pages, while other content would be the pages' contents. ### Describe the benefits this feature would bring to BookStack users This would allow others to extend the functionality of Bookstack. ### Additional context _No response_

OVERLORD added the 🌔 Out of scope 🔨 Feature Request labels 2026-02-05 04:44:18 +03:00

OVERLORD closed this issue

2026-02-05 04:44:22 +03:00

OVERLORD commented

2026-02-05 04:44:31 +03:00

@ssddanbrown commented on GitHub (Feb 22, 2022):

Thanks for the request @craibuc.
This is somewhat related to #2604.

I can see a feature such as this being a fairly major burden in terms of support and maintenance while providing little to no benefit for the majority of BookStack use-cases and adding usability complexity where it is used. Hence I may look to close this off as out of scope. The current benefit listed is very general and chasing extension for the sake of extension and usage flexibility is not something I believe to be sustainable.

@ssddanbrown commented on GitHub (Feb 22, 2022): Thanks for the request @craibuc. This is somewhat related to #2604. I can see a feature such as this being a fairly major burden in terms of support and maintenance while providing little to no benefit for the majority of BookStack use-cases and adding usability complexity where it is used. Hence I may look to close this off as out of scope. The current benefit listed is very general and chasing extension for the sake of extension and usage flexibility is not something I believe to be sustainable.

OVERLORD commented

2026-02-05 04:44:35 +03:00

@ssddanbrown commented on GitHub (Mar 2, 2022):

As per above, will go ahead and close this off as out of scope.

@ssddanbrown commented on GitHub (Mar 2, 2022): As per above, will go ahead and close this off as out of scope.

OVERLORD referenced this issue

2026-02-05 10:23:12 +03:00

[PR #2660] [CLOSED] Bump y18n from 4.0.0 to 4.0.1 #6038

Sign in to join this conversation.