Pending

User tests: Successful: Unsuccessful:

avatar brianteeman
brianteeman
7 Mar 2018

Pull Request for Issue #19856 reported by @MartijnMaandag

Summary of Changes

On the Tab 'Publishing' we do have the label 'Created by Alias' in Contacts, Banners and Articles (although in Contacts it is 'Created By Alias' with capital 'B').

This PR makes them all "Created by Alias"

In Tags, Newsfeeds and frontend content editing this is uses a generic string called 'Author's Alias'.

This PR makes the generic string "Created by Alias" and updates the generic description

c7dd7f9 7 Mar 2018 avatar brianteeman caps
avatar brianteeman brianteeman - open - 7 Mar 2018
avatar brianteeman brianteeman - change - 7 Mar 2018
Status New Pending
avatar joomla-cms-bot joomla-cms-bot - change - 7 Mar 2018
Category Administration Language & Strings
avatar Twincarb
Twincarb - comment - 7 Mar 2018

I have tested this item successfully on 7b0ac02


This comment was created with the J!Tracker Application at issues.joomla.org/tracker/joomla-cms/19857.

avatar Twincarb
Twincarb - comment - 7 Mar 2018

I have tested this item successfully on 7b0ac02


This comment was created with the J!Tracker Application at issues.joomla.org/tracker/joomla-cms/19857.

avatar Twincarb Twincarb - test_item - 7 Mar 2018 - Tested successfully
avatar Quy
Quy - comment - 7 Mar 2018

I have tested this item successfully on 7b0ac02


This comment was created with the J!Tracker Application at issues.joomla.org/tracker/joomla-cms/19857.

avatar Quy Quy - test_item - 7 Mar 2018 - Tested successfully
avatar Quy Quy - change - 7 Mar 2018
Status Pending Ready to Commit
avatar Quy
Quy - comment - 7 Mar 2018

RTC


This comment was created with the J!Tracker Application at issues.joomla.org/tracker/joomla-cms/19857.

avatar infograf768
infograf768 - comment - 8 Mar 2018

II suggest to get rid of the "COM_CONTACT_FIELD_CREATED_BY_ALIAS_LABEL" and use in the xml the JGLOBAL_FIELD_CREATED_BY_ALIAS_LABEL string instead.
In that xml we already use some JGLOBAL strings.

avatar infograf768 infograf768 - change - 9 Mar 2018
Status Ready to Commit Pending
avatar infograf768
infograf768 - comment - 9 Mar 2018

I am taking of the milestone and RTC until someone explains to me why the simplification I suggested above makes no sense.


This comment was created with the J!Tracker Application at issues.joomla.org/tracker/joomla-cms/19857.

avatar brianteeman
brianteeman - comment - 9 Mar 2018

Its really simple. The rules for J3 language files are that we should not delete any string. So even if we are not using the component specific string here it will still exist. Therefore there is no point in changing from the component specific string to the generic string.

avatar infograf768
infograf768 - comment - 9 Mar 2018

It's really simple: even if the string shall not be deleted (just leave it in this case without modification although I am pretty sure it is not used by any third party) it makes sense to change in core the xml to the global one and mark the Contact one as deprecated.

avatar brianteeman
brianteeman - comment - 9 Mar 2018

we cant be certain. these are your rules not mine. I wont comment any further as you have an agenda that is nothing to do with this PR

avatar rdeutz
rdeutz - comment - 9 Mar 2018

I don't know what are the rules we have to apply here, but using a global TAG make sense.

I have understand (understanding the fact) that we are not removing TAGS from ini files, so I can see a situation coming that someone changes a component ini file and wondering why the frontend string doesn't change. So at least we need a comment within the ini file to mark a Tag as not longer in use.

I would appreciate a clear written down set of rules for handeling language files.

avatar brianteeman
brianteeman - comment - 9 Mar 2018

If we want to have a global tag for this component then we should have it for all of them.

avatar infograf768
infograf768 - comment - 10 Mar 2018

When there is a global constant available, — and we are absolutely sure its value can't be translated differently depending on the place where it is used by any language —, it is indeed a very good idea to deprecate the local instance with the same value. As usual, and as decided previously, the deprecation should be done in next major release, i.e. 4.0.

avatar brianteeman brianteeman - change - 10 Mar 2018
Status Pending Closed
Closed_Date 0000-00-00 00:00:00 2018-03-10 08:06:50
Closed_By brianteeman
avatar brianteeman brianteeman - close - 10 Mar 2018
avatar rdeutz
rdeutz - comment - 25 Oct 2023

@brianteeman can you make this PR again for 5.1, we discussed it today and accept the solution you have proposed. Thanks in advance.

Add a Comment

Login with GitHub to post a comment