Closed (cannot reproduce)
Project:
Drupal.org customizations
Version:
7.x-3.x-dev
Component:
User interface
Priority:
Normal
Category:
Feature request
Assigned:
Unassigned
Reporter:
Created:
13 Jul 2011 at 13:54 UTC
Updated:
23 Jan 2014 at 20:54 UTC
Jump to comment: Most recent, Most recent file
Comments
Comment #1
jthorson commentedSmall tweak: Since the issue properties can't be edited on the node edit form, the 'tags' fieldset is empty ... it probably shouldn't be displayed at all.
Comment #2
jhodgdonFrom that other issue, another thing that needs fixing:
(webchick): Something's wrong with the "revision X by FOO" line. It looks like $node->revision_uid is the uid of the last person to make a comment on an issue, not the person who last edited the node (wtf?).
http://issue-summaries-drupal.redesign.devdrupal.org/node/1179994 is an example on the staging site, btw. The node was created by lvto2000, but last commented on by GloGi.
The text says "Revision 1 by GloGi on July 1, 2011 at 7:43am"
Should say: "Revision 1 by lvto2000 on July 1, 2011 at 7:43am"
Oh man. :( This is unfortunately not the fault of the issue summary code. :( #1217190: Interaction between project issue's comment behavior and node_save is causing revision author to update to comment author
Comment #3
jhodgdonFrom sun, comment #208 on the other issue:
I guess input format access permissions will get in our way very soon.
To remedy that, we need to allow to use IMG + TABLE for Filtered HTML; or more generally, all the stuff that's possible with the Documentation input format.
[my comment] Actually, this is another issue already: #995354: Docs format and Docs role - figure out what to do
Comment #4
jhodgdonFrom sun, another note (comment #210):
The "Revision X" link points to a diff, but the node IDs are reversed; i.e., in the revision diff, the new version appears as old, the old appears as new.
Example: #342316: Introduce proper Form API #types for 'option' and 'optgroup', and make #options consistent.
Comment #5
joachim commentedMore of a structural nature: #1221190: The Issue summary should augment the original post, not replace it.
Comment #6
sunPatch in #1217286-13: Posting a comment changes too many issue node revision properties (also) contains a fix for the reversed issue summary revision diff link.
Comment #7
donquixote commentedsub
Comment #8
klonos...subscribing.
Comment #9
rfaySubscribing.
Comment #10
lisarex commentedLooks like another related issue here: #1222082: Move Issue Summary text elsewhere
Comment #11
neclimdulNew issue: #1230258: Make a comment for each wiki modification
Comment #11.0
neclimdulProper summary.
Comment #12
jacineNew issue #1233970: Add a friendly message to comment form to update issue summary :)
Comment #13
klonosThis issue's summary needs to be updated according to the Issue summary standards suggested template ;)
Since this is about tweaking the UI, these related issues might be worth including in the list:
#19386: Automatically search for duplicate issues/questions before submitting new issue/question
#33475: Attachment summary: Issue attachments should be grouped together and placed on top of the page - near the issue summary
#1221190: The Issue summary should augment the original post, not replace it
#1234118: Figure out a way to enforce the "Issue summary template" or offer an easy way to use it.
#1245508: Issue summaries: Allow outdated attached files to be hidden/replaced/flagged.
Comment #14
dww@klonos: thanks for the list. However, why not just edit the summary directly instead of duplicating the effort in a comment? Also, I fail to see what #19386: Automatically search for duplicate issues/questions before submitting new issue/question has to do with any of this. That's about submitting new issues. This whole effort is about the mess that the new issue summary stuff has created and what we can do to fix it. That's about existing issues and their summaries, not new issues.
Cheers,
-Derek
p.s. I made a proposal at #1217286-60: Posting a comment changes too many issue node revision properties that has a lot of UI implications. Not sure the most appropriate place to have posted it, but I'd encourage folks reading this issue to check out that proposal in particular. Thanks.
Comment #15
donquixote commented#1170278: Introduce hook_menu_router_update()
"Revision 1 by silverwing on May 27, 2011 at 2:23am"
Something is going wrong here.
- The original author was donquixote, so I assume that user silverwing has edited..
- I don't see a "Revisions" tab.
Comment #16
dww@donquixote: Right, please read the issue summary in this issue. ;)
Comment #17
klonoscomment by Jeremy from #1 above:
That fieldset is still there...
It should either be completely removed (if here is no intention to ever allow tag adding/editing while editing issues' summaries) because it is a -minor- UX wtf, or tag editing should actually be allowed when editing the issue summary. I personally vote for the second, but I don't know if there is an issue filed for that or if this issue here is the right place for it(?).
Comment #17.0
klonosAdd make comment on edit issue (#1230258)
Comment #18
klonos...the screenshot I uploaded for the comment above got lost along the way somehow.
Comment #19
mgiffordI think this is all changed with the D7 upgrade.