User tests: Successful: Unsuccessful:
Pull Request for Issue # .
Note fields are useful for transferring data to a template or to third-party extensions
Added the group_note field to the field list output request
When you receive a list of material fields from the FieldsHelper :: getFields method, the group_note field should appear in the elements
When you receive a list of material fields from the FieldsHelper :: getFields method, the group_note field should appear in the elements
| Status | New | ⇒ | Pending |
| Category | ⇒ | Administration com_fields |
For example - a module - a plugin for creating filters by fields that will be bound to fields by means of a label located in note.
I actively use this technique with this CCK http://fieldsattach.com/
| Status | Pending | ⇒ | Closed |
| Closed_Date | 0000-00-00 00:00:00 | ⇒ | 2017-05-09 14:31:48 |
| Closed_By | ⇒ | rigin | |
| Labels |
Added:
?
|
||
| Status | Closed | ⇒ | New |
| Closed_Date | 2017-05-09 14:31:48 | ⇒ | |
| Closed_By | rigin | ⇒ |
| Status | New | ⇒ | Pending |
As we now have custom fields I dont see the need for this.
| Title |
|
||||||
@brianteeman This is not related to custom fields, @rigin only adds an existing field to the SQL query.
Like @laoneo I don't see any harm in adding this field.
I have tested this item
@icampus
I have tested this item
| Status | Pending | ⇒ | Ready to Commit |
Ready to Commit after two successful tests.
| Status | Ready to Commit | ⇒ | Closed |
| Closed_Date | 0000-00-00 00:00:00 | ⇒ | 2018-07-23 13:47:21 |
| Closed_By | ⇒ | roland-d | |
| Labels |
Added:
?
|
||
Honestly I don't see the use case, but the change will harm nobody.