Rename "Content has type" to "Content is of type"

+1 for "content is of type". Feel free to roll a patch ;)

I feel it should be ""Content is of type(s)". Since we can check for multiple content types in the condition

It looks like the string was already changed somewhere along the line. The corresponding help text, however, wasn't. Here's a patch. As it's basically a typo fix I'm just going to mark it RBTC, and then if the maintainer commits it we can change it to "patch (to be ported)" and get it back to D6 as well.

+++ rules/modules/node.rules.inc	3 Jun 2010 00:01:58 -0000
@@ -95,7 +95,7 @@ function rules_node_condition_info() {
+    'help' => t('Evaluates to TRUE, if the given content is of one of the selected content types.'),

Shopuldn't it be "Evaluates to TRUE, if the given content is one of the selected content types." ?

Powered by Dreditor.

Yep, and there is another mistake in 7.x. The support for putting help text directly in the info hook is gone, we need to create a small method in the .rules.inc file for that.

@name-change: I've taken over this name of the condition for 7.x

@klausi: The other "of" actually belongs in there. If the option is "content is of type" then the help should read "...content is of one of the selected content types". We're just replacing the word "type" with "one of the selected content types". So if you eliminate the extraneous comma (@Aren Cambre), you have "Evaluates to TRUE if the given content is of one of the selected content types."

#6: rules-649438.patch queued for re-testing.

Oh, good. It really isn't just me.

Testbot is apparently confused about what Rules' dependencies are when it runs the tests. I heard from boombatower that an update to the testbot should show up sometime next week. Until someone knows otherwise, I don't think we can test Rules patches until that happens.

#6: rules-649438.patch queued for re-testing.

http://qa.drupal.org/pifr/test/27274 -> at Wed, 06/09/2010 - 10:31:02 the general branch test worked.

#6: rules-649438.patch queued for re-testing.

Great! Now here's #6 with the extraneous comma removed, per numbers 9 and 10.

that's already done.

ah, sry I missed the follow-up #19. Thanks, committed that.