? Pending

User tests: Successful: Unsuccessful:

avatar brianteeman
brianteeman
16 May 2021

This PR removes the function setSeparator that is not used in joomla 4

maintainers will need to decide if this is safe to delete or if it needs to be deprecated first.

Pull Request for Issue #33831

avatar brianteeman brianteeman - open - 16 May 2021
avatar brianteeman brianteeman - change - 16 May 2021
Status New Pending
avatar joomla-cms-bot joomla-cms-bot - change - 16 May 2021
Category Modules Front End
avatar Quy
Quy - comment - 16 May 2021

Please remove use statements.

avatar brianteeman brianteeman - change - 16 May 2021
Labels Added: ?
avatar ceford ceford - test_item - 18 May 2021 - Tested successfully
avatar ceford
ceford - comment - 18 May 2021

I have tested this item successfully on f4fd2aa

I looked at the code and confirm that the function is not used anywhere in the core Joomla code. And that the breadcrumb separator is set by css.

What about those two png files that are not used? Should they be removed too? In a separate PR of course.


This comment was created with the J!Tracker Application at issues.joomla.org/tracker/joomla-cms/33913.

avatar Quy Quy - test_item - 18 May 2021 - Tested successfully
avatar Quy
Quy - comment - 18 May 2021

I have tested this item successfully on f4fd2aa


This comment was created with the J!Tracker Application at issues.joomla.org/tracker/joomla-cms/33913.

avatar Quy Quy - change - 18 May 2021
Status Pending Ready to Commit
avatar Quy
Quy - comment - 18 May 2021

RTC


This comment was created with the J!Tracker Application at issues.joomla.org/tracker/joomla-cms/33913.

avatar richard67
richard67 - comment - 23 May 2021

@wilsonge Do you remember if we wanted to keep the function not used by the core and removed by this PR for 3rd party use?

avatar brianteeman
brianteeman - comment - 23 May 2021

modules/mod_breadcrumbs/src/Helper/BreadcrumbsHelper.php

Is specific to the module so unlikely to be used by anything else

avatar richard67
richard67 - comment - 24 May 2021

I've found nobody who could tell me why we should keep this function. No idea why the RLDQ label was set before.

avatar rdeutz
rdeutz - comment - 29 May 2021

Very unlikely but someone cloud have created an overwrite and used the function within the overwrite. Maybe better to mark it as depreciated and remove it with 5.0

avatar brianteeman
brianteeman - comment - 29 May 2021

ok - i will update or replace this later

avatar rdeutz rdeutz - change - 29 May 2021
Status Ready to Commit Pending
avatar brianteeman brianteeman - change - 29 May 2021
Status Pending Closed
Closed_Date 0000-00-00 00:00:00 2021-05-29 15:23:29
Closed_By brianteeman
avatar brianteeman brianteeman - close - 29 May 2021

Add a Comment

Login with GitHub to post a comment