Closed (duplicate)
Project:
Node import
Version:
6.x-1.x-dev
Component:
Code
Priority:
Normal
Category:
Feature request
Assigned:
Unassigned
Reporter:
Created:
23 Feb 2009 at 17:07 UTC
Updated:
23 Feb 2009 at 20:18 UTC
It worked! Hurrah! Good job, all!
imported 600kb spreadsheet w/ taxonomy and cck fields. All woked as it should!
Note: spreadsheet also has cck date, cck link and cck asin (from amazon module) that did not map or import, as expected, but did not cause an issue, either.
Connie
PS (Could I please ask that the above cck fields be added to the feature request list)
Comments
Comment #1
vm commentedif no bugs, why marking as bug report?
Comment #2
conniec commentedNot sure what else to mark Suggestion? On occasion, I've been helping to test newest dev and am reporting results.
please let me kmow a better way.
Connie
Comment #3
vm commentedideally, if you are requesting features it should be a feature request which is what I've re-tagged this issue.
Comment #4
conniec commentedThe feature request is lagniappe. I should have put it in a separate post. Me Culpa
This post is primarily to report test results. What is the best way to post test results?
Connie
Comment #5
vm commentedI don't have an answer for that question. The issue queue doesn't have a category for positive results of testing.
I'd suppose rather then opening issues for positive reports, using the contact form of the developer may be a better idea if you are so inclined. Though don't take that as it's written in stone. Ultimately, positive feedback will be closed out as the issue queues are cleaned up and the positive feedback would be lost. Beyond that if a pattern is started with regards to positive feedback in the issue queue it could double the work as others begin to do the same.
That said, this is the developers queue so he/she has final say in how positive feedback should be reported.
Comment #6
Robrecht Jacques commentedWell, it's rewarding to see positive responses instead of negative ones (bugs, features) all the time :-)
But it does clutter the issue queue, so I'd prefer you to send me a personal message instead.
If a CCK field is not required and/or has a default value, then indeed you would not get any errors. However, all CCK modules need their own support file, so if a CCK module has not yet been supported, you would not be able to map it.
Let's split up this issue:
The last two I have just created.
Thanks for you comments!