@Minei3oat I think it would be better if you add the missing css instead of removing the script

Now the missing css is added.

The Bootstrap code is in conflict with Beez3 (Look at the buttons when editing an article or module: https://github.com/joomla/joomla-cms/blob/staging/templates/beez3/css/personal.css#L145-L186).

Since Beez3 sometimes didn't uses chosen and uses a very simple style, I'm thinking about removing btn-group entirely like I've done first. Its not really needed.

@minei3oat what is the status of this. If I read your last comment correctly there is more work to be done before it is ready for testing?

Yes, that's right, there are is the problem with the buttons when editing an article.

@Minei3oat Is this issue still relevant?

Otherwise @nibra will look at it

This issue was never relevant.
The buttons work without the design as good as with the colored design. Because of this, I first wanted to remove the useless JavaScript-code but as you can see there was the wish of adding the missing css instead of removing the js. But as this issue is not so relevant and my time limited I don't invested much and so it got stuck with the conflicts.

@Minei3oat so should this PR be closed?

As there is still useless code, I propose to go back to the original intention of this PR and delete this code.
If someone want's to add the colored buttons later, the code can be copied from Protostar.

@Minei3oat is this PR ready for Test?

Now it should be ready for testing.

thanks @Minei3oat

@Minei3oat i have tested a little but have less Experience in Beez so it would help if you can instruct which Sample Sites to look easy for testing.

As I explained above, the removed code was useless because the CSS-Classes are missing. I discovered this by viewing a form with btn-group.

If code-review counts as test, the best test would be to search the CSS-Classes added by the removed JS and see that they not exists.

can you give me an Example of Form with btn-group so i can test if

Beez should work as before.

If you edit a module their is the possibility to change the status of the module (Published/Unpublished/Trashed). This is a btn-group, as you can see in Protostar.

Tested on an Article (Publish / Unpublish / ...) cause using Beez Icon on Module for "Edit" isn't shown. All works as without Patch but Source-Code looks same with- and without PR.

The Article-View doesn't uses btn-group.
With adding &template=beez3 to the URL you can change the template to Beez for the request.

http://localhost:8888/3/index.php/en/park-blog/18-second-blog-post&template=beez3 doesn't change Template.

Because there is no other parameter in the URL it must be a ? instead of a &.

that works. But there is also no Icon on Module.

1. Load the page with the module you want to edit with an other template
2. Click the edit icon
3. add the parameter to the URL

This will result in the edit page of the module displayed with Beez as template.

Source-Code without PR:

Source-Code with PR:

For Tester: use &template=beez3

Due to unknown reasons Beez uses the class btn-group for this buttons (sometimes all in one div, sometimes all in separat divs) without using them in CSS. But this code is hardcoded in PHP-Files in /html/... and not influenced by this PR.

so how to Test this PR?

As I stated above the code was useless. So I don't know how to test this PR. Imho there is the option to compare the functionality of some pages/btn-groups before and after the PR and find no difference or to look at the CSS of Beez and see that the JS-Code was useless. (Beez doesn't have CSS-Rules for active in this context, btn-primary, btn-succes, btn-danger, disabled)

Hopefully there are 2 other Tester with more Skills.

If this PR get no Response, it will be closed at 17th September 2017.

Set to "closed" on behalf of @franz-wohlkoenig by The JTracker Application at issues.joomla.org/joomla-cms/12029

This has been closed due to lack of response to the requests above – it can always be reopened.