The integration with Token would allow to create PHP actions with Rules.

Comments

dave reid’s picture

I'm not sure what exactly you mean. How exactly will token help xmlsitemap?

avpaderno’s picture

Title: Integration with token.module » Add Integration with token.module, or make a complete integration with rules.modules

The purpose is to allow the creation of custom Rules action using PHP; as Rules allows to add tokens directly into PHP code, this would allow to change the logic used in assigning the site map priority to nodes, or users.

This is just an example, but the point is that the logic of the code would not be hardwired, and it could be possible to alterate it from outside code.

avpaderno’s picture

I changed the title of the report as it is possible to obtain the same result in two different ways; implementing Rules conditions is the second one.

webchick’s picture

Hm. Really? Isn't a hook good enough for the 1.x release? Rules integration seems like a nicety but hardly something that's release critical.

dave reid’s picture

Seriously, adding SimpleTests to improve module reliability should have a much bigger priority than this. :/

avpaderno’s picture

A hook is perfect for a module, while Rules actions doesn't require an administrator to add code in a module.

I didn't mean this task has any priority over a other task; I simply created the report so I could remember it, and to get suggestions on it.

avpaderno’s picture

Assigned: Unassigned » avpaderno
avpaderno’s picture

Assigned: avpaderno » Unassigned
Anonymous’s picture

Version: 6.x-1.x-dev » 6.x-2.x-dev

Kiam, is this for 2.x?

avpaderno’s picture

I cannot talk of the 2.x branch because it has been assigned to Dave Reid (it seems).

dave reid’s picture

That still isn't official yet, but it seems to be the plan that everyone is headed towards. I think it should be smart to move pretty much all feature requests to the 6.x-2.x-dev version as postponed and get the 6.x-1.x-dev issues down to bugfixes only.

dave reid’s picture

Title: Add Integration with token.module, or make a complete integration with rules.modules » Token and Rules integration
Status: Active » Postponed

Marking as postponed for now. It will probably be a bit until I can get to this.

mitchell’s picture

Issue tags: +rules integration

tagging

dave reid’s picture

Version: 6.x-2.x-dev » 7.x-2.x-dev
bryancasler’s picture

subscribe

playfulwolf’s picture

Issue summary: View changes
Status: Postponed » Active

Currently working on a project where the workflow will have some "semi-published" states, mostly with scheduled content (for simplicity lets say and similar to"event" type), where it has to have these states:

-Published, included in sitemap
-Published, included in sitemap but with more/less weight
-Published, excluded from sitemap

The easiest would be an integration with Rules/Token of these actions:
-Exclude from sitemap
-Include to sitemap
-Change weight ("set data value" probably should work)

p.s. Marking this as active, as there are many similar requests and the only real solution is to write hack-ish code with decent amount of black magic

phily’s picture

Dealing sitemap.xml inclusion with Rules will be very usefull for me too.
In my case, I need to include/exclude in the sitemap.xml depending of a node field value at node save event (either creation or updating).