These are NOT php or database settings

Core backend template is NOT a requirement

I have tested this item ? unsuccessfully on 33a0aed

Core backend template is NOT a requirement

Will move it to the optional thing than fine for me.

These are NOT php or database settings

Agree its on my list to be updated too.

The requested changes have been pushed. They are now both under "the seccond box" and the title has been updated too.

why check for isis? there is more than 1 admin template

Neither of these checks are anything to do with compatibility. They are only really needed to perhaps make the update easier. This is just creating FUD

Here in the 4.0 update SQL we check for hathor and isis and update to atum if one of these is used: https://github.com/joomla/joomla-cms/blob/4.0-dev/administrator/components/com_admin/sql/updates/mysql/4.0.0-2018-03-05.sql#L23

And one row below we check for protostar and beez 3 for the frontend.

So why do the language strings added by this PR here not mention hathor or beez3? It should work same well as with the other core templates.

We should not provide false information in language strings which are made to guide people.

This and the other PR should be closed and re-evaluated. There is ZERO reason for either PR.

Not withstanding the code issues the concept of both PR is wrong!! They only succeed in spreading fear, uncertainty and doubt about the upgrade process.

I can't believe you are even remotely thinking about such a change after the final release candidate.

I have tested this item ? unsuccessfully on 164496e

So why do the language strings added by this PR here not mention hathor or beez3? It should work same well as with the other core templates.

Isnt hathor gone already? I can add them for sure.

I can't believe you are even remotely thinking about such a change after the final release candidate.

It has been raised by the @joomla/cms-release-team that there should be messages like that. I see where an "pre upgrade checker" could warn about such issues that affect the site performance after the upgrade or the upgrade process.

For example an non-core backed templates or non-core frotend template could break the site once upgraded so the recommendation would be for the time of the upgrade to switch to the core where we know that the upgrade works and they are beeing replaced by 4.x compatible code than you can go and enable the other stuff step by step too.

The router stuff is something different happening under the hood so the idea was to tell the people that there could be changes in the URLs joomla generates after the upgrade.

Isnt hathor gone already?

No - just not supported. You obviously didnt even check. https://github.com/joomla/joomla-cms/tree/3.10-dev/administrator/templates

It has been raised by the @joomla/cms-release-team that there should be messages like that.

Excuse my language but "a bit bloody late"

For example an non-core backed templates or non-core frotend template could break the site once upgraded so the recommendation would be for the time of the upgrade to switch to the core where we know that the upgrade works and they are beeing replaced by 4.x compatible code than you can go and enable the other stuff step by step too.

But that is not what you are doing or saying with these pr

The router stuff is something different happening under the hood so the idea was to tell the people that there could be changes in the URLs joomla generates after the upgrade.

Again that is not what is being done or said with these PR.

No - just not supported. You obviously didnt even check. https://github.com/joomla/joomla-cms/tree/3.10-dev/administrator/templates

Hmm I'm sure we did a postinstall for hathor users but yes seems its still shipped.

But that is not what you are doing or saying with these pr

Than its great that you raised this questions so that this can be clarified. What can be done to do what I'm trying to do?

Beside all other points: Now as both checks are located in the “Recommended …” ckecks, the title of this PR is wrong regarding required and recommended.

Fixed thanks

Maybe brian is partly right. The way to fix this is to complex, reduce it to a simple change in

Set atum to the default template on upgrade and leave the frontend template alone, the frontend template can't break the admin on update but the backend template can. Activating the old template again by the user is his/her decision. And I would expect less support requests at least for copy/paste admin templates.

Set atum to the default template on upgrade and leave the frontend template alone, the frontend template can't break the admin on update but the backend template can.

You mean ignoring any possible non-core backend template after the upgrade and force everyone to atum right?

Set atum to the default template on upgrade and leave the frontend template alone, the frontend template can't break the admin on update but the backend template can.

You mean ignoring any possible non-core backend template after the upgrade and force everyone to atum right?

yes

Set atum to the default template on upgrade and leave the frontend template alone, the frontend template can't break the admin on update but the backend template can.

You mean ignoring any possible non-core backend template after the upgrade and force everyone to atum right?

yes

Hmm with or without the warning mentiond here? Maybe change the message something like "hey you are one a non-core backend template that will be changed to atum after the upgrade"?

Don't think it's needed, my opinion is that people would expect a new backend template.

Don't think it's needed, my opinion is that people would expect a new backend template.

Ok so the way to go would be to drop this PR but change the update SQL in 4.0 to always update the backend template. Fine for me.

@wilsonge if this is ok for you then yes PR should be done against 4.0

@HLeithner is correct with the way to go. I logged in this morning to say virtually the same thing. The only difference being that I thought (maybe wrong) that we did already set atum as the default admin template.

I also wanted to point out that just because someone is using a non core admin template does not automatically mean that its not compatible with joomla 4. Making that assumption is the same as telling people to disable all extensions without even checking for their compatibility.

The only thing that I might consider doing if people really insist would be a notice that said "We detected that you are not using a core admin template. You might find the upgrade process smoother if you switch to use the Isis template."

The only thing that I might consider doing if people really insist would be a notice that said "We detected that you are not using a core admin template. You might find the upgrade process smoother if you switch to use the Isis template."

PR updated with that.

Sorry I wasn't clear. I absolutely would not put the notice in the checks. I would revert all the changes that you have made from php recommendations to php and joomla recommendations and simply do this notice as an on screen message. As I am clearly having problems describing things here is a picture.

Sorry I wasn't clear. I absolutely would not put the notice in the checks. I would revert all the changes that you have made from php recommendations to php and joomla recommendations and simply do this notice as an on screen message. As I am clearly having problems describing things here is a picture.

@zero-24 I agree with @brianteeman .

code has been updated @brianteeman @richard67

Ah missed that there is also a link requested to the styles will update the language string now

language string & screenshots updated now too.

@zero-24 This PR has a conflict now due to previously merged PR #35105 . Please resolve. Thanks in advance.

merge confilct fixed.

Sorry but the warning message position is completely the wrong place for it in my opinion.

I have finally found a custom backend template to test: https://www.joomlatema.net/joomla-templates/free-joomla-templates/adminim-free-joomla-administrator-template.html

I have just updated the test instructions. Would be great to get some tests here with the new blue message.

Since I saw this PR under Milestones 3.10.2, I wanted to try it & to check the blue message :-)
Joomla Version: 3.10.1

Downloaded to install admin template (Adminim_Joomla_Admin_Template.zip) but got:
Error
There was an error uploading this file to the server.
Unable to find install package

Update to above: Will try another one (unzip first) .....

• 2nd admin template: Installed unzipped via FTP. Was not visible in the backend.
• 3rd admin template: Vallis installed & activated.
  
• applied this patch
• pointed the update server to joomla 4 via the Joomla Next update server

Pre-Update Check for Joomla 4.0.2

Result:

Will leave it for today, but want to go back later to Isis and J 3.10.1 again :-)

Will leave it for today, but want to go back later to Isis and J 3.10.1 again :-)

The message seems to be correct to me, so this would be a successfull test. :)

I have tested this item ✅ successfully on ad7b419

But it's not in blue :-)
Would also prefer to switch to Isis before updating. Similar to the frontend template on Protostar (if you were on a copy)

But it's not in blue :-)

I have just double checked that, it seems the template does not show "info" as blue. But isis does so it seems the template decided to show information messages in yellow which is a chooise of the template.

Sorry but the warning message position is completely the wrong place for it in my opinion.

I'm sorry @HLeithner seems I have missed this comment. Do you have another proposal where that message should be shown while it should only be shown too a small number of sites anyway right?

like all other warnings, maybe in a new section.

like all other warnings, maybe in a new section.

What kind of new section do you have in mind?

@HLeithner can we get a response here so the PR can be adjusted or closed based on the feedback?

I thought about something like "Required PHP & Database Settings".

Is it required or an php or database setting? This is exactly the place where all of this started but it was moved outside of this checks for that reason and moved into a standalone blue message.

not in this box, a new box like this box

And how would you call it, what would we show when you are running isis? Just as a reminder its only showed when you have a non-isis backend template?

Will take this now in as it is for now. When we find better ways to display it I'm open to change it.