We have the same "issue" in the AdminController, not sure if FromController is the right place to implement this.

Yes, I’m aware of that. However, since AdminController does not extend FormController, there isn’t a straightforward way to share these methods between them. One alternative would be to introduce a trait for these reusable methods, but adding a trait for just one or two methods might not be justified at this stage.

Please note that AdminController already contains its own implementation of a similar method (https://github.com/joomla/joomla-cms/blob/6.1-dev/libraries/src/MVC/Controller/AdminController.php#L479), which mirrors the one in FormController (https://github.com/joomla/joomla-cms/blob/6.1-dev/libraries/src/MVC/Controller/FormController.php#L506). That means that the two controller classes were designed to be independent. So maybe the two methods can stay here in FormController, then we can implement getRedirectToListUrl method to AdminController, too.

if it should not be in the base class then a trait is perfectly fine for this.

The trait would then only contains getRedirectToListUrl because AdminController does not need getRedirectToItemUrl. I'm unsure if that makes much sense.

you might be right, then please add the getRedirectToListUrl to the also to the admincontroller

you might be right, then please add the getRedirectToListUrl to the also to the admincontroller

Done, thanks ! FYI, I see many possible improvements to FormController code (especially for save method) to make easier to override when it is needed. As of right now, many child controllers in have to copy/paste the whole code of the method (for example https://github.com/joomla/joomla-cms/blob/6.1-dev/administrator/components/com_finder/src/Controller/FilterController.php#L40) to add it own logic which is not nice. We should improve it.

that's true, if you find a nice way to split the save function into multiple so easier overriding is possible please go for it.

I cannot speak about whether it is needed.
But I would suggest to use different naming, like getRedirectUrl...(), getRedirectUrlFoo(), getRedirectUrlBar().
It should be more easy to search and read in my opinion.

I cannot speak about whether it is needed.

The two methods provide quicker way to get the URLs instead of having to repeat writing longer code to build these URLs everywhere (the two classes modified in this PR are just a start, there are many code like that in child classes)

But I would suggest to use different naming, like getRedirectUrl...(), getRedirectUrlFoo(), getRedirectUrlBar()

I'm open for suggestion. In my extensions, I use getViewListUrl and getViewItemUrl. I think the suggested getRedirectUrl does not really describe what the methods do.

I think the suggested getRedirectUrl does not really describe what the methods do.

I just mean "flip words" around getRedirectToItemUrl => getRedirectUrlToItem 😉

I just mean "flip words" around getRedirectToItemUrl => getRedirectUrlToItem

Thanks, it's indeed better, but having a little naming conflict with the existing method getRedirectToItemAppend. But I changed the name as suggested.

that's true, if you find a nice way to split the save function into multiple so easier overriding is possible please go for it.

@HLeithner PR created #46537. I also include changes from this PR in that PR to make the code shorter/more clear.