[#25095] - Use published date in the category feed view
- Closed
- 5 Jun 2019
- Medium
- Build: staging
- # 25095
- Diff
- AndNovAtor:staging
User tests: Successful: Unsuccessful:
Pull Request for Issue #20885 .
Recreated #21684 PR for 3.9 branch.
(Also old PR was suddeny closed)
Summary of Changes
libraries/src/MVC/View/CategoryFeedView.php
Testing Instructions
Access feed and check published date is used instead of creation date (when set) and that it falls back to creation date when the published date isn't set
Expected result
Use published date in the category feed view instead of creation date. For example, for RSS 2.0, in <pubDate> creation date is used.
Actual result
Use published date in the category feed, for eaxample, for RSS 2.0, in <pubDate>.
Documentation Changes Required
Nothing to change
| Status | New | ⇒ | Pending |
joomla-cms-bot
- | Category | ⇒ | Libraries |
| Title |
|
||||||
I'm against die change in 3.9 and in j4 this should be optional or better a selectbox with all 3 dates.
test own Pull Request didn't count as its expected, that a PR ist tested gefore creating a PR.
Sorry, I removed my marked comment.
I'm against die change in 3.9 and in j4 this should be optional or better a selectbox with all 3 dates.
@HLeithner, Cmn! Joomla 3.x NEVER dies, for example, 'cos Internet Explorer. So, there are the issue - there are PR for this issue.
So for j4 it MAYBE will be optional, but for J 3.9 it's issue - it's contrary to RSS <pubdate>.
But OK, I understand your position.
@HLeithner Please consider for 3.9.7. #21684 is the same PR with RTC status.
@Quy as already mention above, I see this as a new feature and a major and unexpected change for the user base.
It's maybe valid for J4 but only with the options to select your date and a default value that is compatible to the current situation.
If you do it in another way every rss reader will mark all articles as new.
The published date on the web page does not match the published date in the RSS as stated #21684 (comment). Since you consider it as a new feature, then this should be closed.
| Status | Pending | ⇒ | Closed |
| Closed_Date | 0000-00-00 00:00:00 | ⇒ | 2019-06-05 18:09:23 |
| Closed_By | ⇒ | HLeithner | |
| Labels |
Added:
?
|
||
SIGH. It was closed AGAIN
Just like I said on the other PR, just code freeze 3.9 then. If you're going to flat out reject bug fixes then there's no point in continuing development.
If the pr is done in a b/c why that doesn't trigger every rss reader like I explain above I would merge it. But then someone starts a discussion if it's a new feature.
About code freeze, we merged 41 PRs into 3.9.7. Based on that I'm not your opinion that no bugs will be fixed.
Ok, my last words: @brianteeman, what do you think about it - is this PR a "new feature" or bugfix after all (you commented in original issue)?
@AndNovAtor I have no role in the decision although personally speaking I agree its a bug fix
test own Pull Request didn't count as its expected, that a PR ist tested gefore creating a PR.