[#44566] - [6.2] [webservice] GET content separate intro & full text
- Ready to Commit
- Medium
- Build: 5.3-dev
- # 44566
- Diff
- alikon:patch-22
User tests: Successful: Unsuccessful:
Pull Request for Issue #41176 .
Summary of Changes
GET content separate intro & full text
Testing Instructions
GET request to {{base_url}}/{{base_path}}/content/articles/{{article_id}}
Actual result BEFORE applying this Pull Request
"text" field with concatenated "introtext" + "fulltext"
Expected result AFTER applying this Pull Request
2 separated fileds intro , fulltext
Link to documentations
Please select:
-
Documentation link for docs.joomla.org:
-
No documentation changes for docs.joomla.org needed
-
Pull Request link for manual.joomla.org:
-
No documentation changes for manual.joomla.org needed
| Status | New | ⇒ | Pending |
| Title |
|
||||||
| Labels |
Added:
Webservices
PR-5.2-dev
|
||
| Labels |
Added:
bug
|
||
| Title |
|
||||||
| Labels |
Added:
PR-5.3-dev
Removed: bug PR-5.2-dev |
||
I have tested this item ✅ successfully on 72caf39
This comment was created with the J!Tracker Application at issues.joomla.org/tracker/joomla-cms/44566.
I have tested this item ✅ successfully on 72caf39
This comment was created with the J!Tracker Application at issues.joomla.org/tracker/joomla-cms/44566.
| Status | Pending | ⇒ | Ready to Commit |
| Build | 5.2-dev | ⇒ | 5.3-dev |
RTC
This comment was created with the J!Tracker Application at issues.joomla.org/tracker/joomla-cms/44566.
This needs a manual entry for the deprecation.
What is the reason to remove the text field?
text is a combination of introtext and fulltext so it is redundant data.
you are not allowed to PATCH introtext and /or fulltext in the current way
textis a combination ofintrotextandfulltextso it is redundant data.
I know but it is much more complicated to remove something than to add something new.
| Title |
|
||||||
HLeithner
- | Title |
|
||||||
| Labels |
Added:
Feature
RTC
Updates Requested
PR-6.0-dev
Removed: PR-5.3-dev |
||
As its not going into 5.3 but 6.0, does the deprecation notice need to be for 8.0 and not 7.0 as it is at the moment? Anyone help me out here?
as i disagree, because 1st it was a bad design and 2nd it has been considered as an not an issue i'll close this pr, i have a complete different opinion on this matter, for me that's an issue and not a new feature
| Status | Ready to Commit | ⇒ | Closed |
| Closed_Date | 0000-00-00 00:00:00 | ⇒ | 2025-03-24 20:26:54 |
| Closed_By | ⇒ | alikon |
| Status | Closed | ⇒ | New |
| Closed_Date | 2025-03-24 20:26:54 | ⇒ | |
| Closed_By | alikon | ⇒ | |
| Labels |
Removed:
RTC
|
||
| Status | New | ⇒ | Pending |
| Title |
|
||||||
| Labels |
Added:
PR-6.2-dev
Removed: Updates Requested PR-6.0-dev |
||
joomla-cms-bot
- | Category | ⇒ | JavaScript Unit Tests |
Thank you for reopening again!
| Labels |
Added:
Unit/System Tests
|
||
What Is the problem here with merging this. Without it you can't realistically have an external editor app for content creation as without this you lose the difference between full and intro text. Seems an obvious bug in the original API design.
I have tested this item ✅ successfully on 8fd4158
I used PHP curl to fetch the article "beginners" from sample data.
After applying the patch i see "introtext" and "fulltext" as additional data.
I compared it with the edit view and the "introtext" and "fulltext" starts and ends where it is expected.
Question:
I checked an article without 'readmore' and both fields were there. The "introtext" contained the full text and the "fulltext" was empty.
? Should it not be the other way round ? "Intro" empty and "Full" with text ?
This comment was created with the J!Tracker Application at issues.joomla.org/tracker/joomla-cms/44566.
I have tested this item ✅ successfully on 8fd4158
I used PHP curl to fetch the article "beginners" from sample data.
After applying the patch i see "introtext" and "fulltext" as additional data.
I compared it with the edit view and the "introtext" and "fulltext" starts and ends where it is expected.
Question:
I checked an article without 'readmore' and both fields were there. The "introtext" contained the full text and the "fulltext" was empty.
? Should it not be the other way round ? "Intro" empty and "Full" with text ?
This comment was created with the J!Tracker Application at issues.joomla.org/tracker/joomla-cms/44566.
@ThomasFinnern you might think that but that's the way it's stored in the dB when there is no readmore and even if it's not logical to anyone it can't be changed
I heard that it is handled already similar in other places so i can live with it.
I have tested this item ✅ successfully on 8fd4158
This comment was created with the J!Tracker Application at issues.joomla.org/tracker/joomla-cms/44566.
I have tested this item ✅ successfully on 8fd4158
This comment was created with the J!Tracker Application at issues.joomla.org/tracker/joomla-cms/44566.
| Status | Pending | ⇒ | Ready to Commit |
RTC
This comment was created with the J!Tracker Application at issues.joomla.org/tracker/joomla-cms/44566.
RTC
This comment was created with the J!Tracker Application at issues.joomla.org/tracker/joomla-cms/44566.
| Labels |
Added:
RTC
|
||
I'm sorry, but this is not a bugfix, but a new feature and has to go into 5.3.