Correct naming of Views handlers

Hmm, yeah, I think it's b/c when I wrote that integration I wasn't sure we'd have an actual "View" page for products. It makes sense to include, even if the URL will be an admin URL, so I've just recently added the necessary build mode for products (like in the last two days). We'll need to add further integration for products with Views now.

Will pull from you and give it a test drive shortly. : )

The pull request worked fine. I pulled your code into my Git repository and tested a fresh install. Everything worked just fine. : )

I think the following things need to be addressed before I mark this fixed:

1. The line item handlers weren't updated.
2. I see that some of your handlers duplicated the module name to include the [table_name] part of the Views standard. Others weren't affected, and that's most likely because they don't have associated table names (looks like it was the link ones). I think we should pick a single standard that works for everything... like either always duplicate the table name (i.e. commerce_order_handler_field_commerce_order_order.inc) or just don't include it at all (i.e. commerce_order_handler_field_order.inc). I think I prefer the second just because it's shorter, but I'm up for other ideas.

Since I've pulled from you, I'm not exactly sure how you should resync with my repository. I wonder if you now need to "git pull" from me before you do further work on your end?

Hmm, so I pulled from you and then pushed to my repo, and without me having to do anything your commits no longer appear in my fork queue. I suppose that means we're kosher - you can just make further changes to your local repo and send another pull request.

As for the instances of Views integration for modules with multiple tables, I think you're right - several do, and in instances like the Order module we'll have commerce_order and commerce_order_revision. Maybe we can adopt a compromise solution:

1. Keep the [table_name]_[field_name] where appropriate, but use a shortened table name - i.e. don't repeat the commerce_. There's precedent for this in the way we're naming the modules directories.
2. For the generic entity / link handlers, keep it as you have it.

I think the full list of handlers would become:

commerce_line_item_handler_argument_line_item_line_item_id.inc
commerce_line_item_handler_field_line_item_line_item_type.inc

commerce_order_handler_field_order.inc
commerce_order_handler_field_order_link.inc
commerce_order_handler_field_order_link_delete.inc
commerce_order_handler_field_order_link_edit.inc
commerce_order_handler_field_order_order_status.inc
commerce_order_handler_argument_order_order_id.inc

commerce_product_handler_field_product.inc
commerce_product_handler_field_product_link.inc
commerce_product_handler_field_product_link_delete.inc
commerce_product_handler_field_product_link_edit.inc
commerce_product_handler_field_product_product_type.inc

If that looks good to you and you have time to make the changes, just send me a pull request on GitHub when it's done. Ohloh's picking up on your commits when I git pull from you. You can claim them as yours if you have an account. It's fun to see more contributors in there. : )

https://www.ohloh.net/p/drupalcommerce/contributors

I just committed the Views integration for a normal product link field per your suggestion. I also updated the default product View. You'll probably need to pull those commits from my repo before sending a pull request for the handler changes.

If you haven't already found it, you should be able to just click the "I am this person" button at your contributor page:

https://www.ohloh.net/p/drupalcommerce/contributors/1684200558214278

Ahh, good catch.

Committed! I made one final tweak and that was to the line item / product type handlers. The field in the DB is simply called "type" for both of those, so I removed the extra line_item_ and product_ prefixes. Thanks, Pedro! : )