Posted by greggles on November 4, 2010 at 5:30pm
3 followers
Jump to:
| Project: | OG Project |
| Version: | 6.x-1.x-dev |
| Component: | Documentation |
| Category: | task |
| Priority: | normal |
| Assigned: | Unassigned |
| Status: | closed (fixed) |
Issue Summary
The module currently has a setting for whether or not there is a 1-1 tie between projects and OG but if you don't have that it doesn't actually do anything (or probably shouldn't).
This seems like unnecessary code and UI bloat to me, probably because the sites I care about that use this module have that 1-1 tie.
I'd like to figure out whether this is optional or a requirement. One thought I've had is to split the project into two (or three?) modules: one that assumes a 1-1 requirement and one that doesn't. That would simplify life for both groups since they wouldn't have to create a separate testing environment to build/test features.
Comments
#1
Based on an IRC chat with greggles, I'm okay making og_project just assume 1:1 project:OG for now. The other approaches never actually worked -- the site I was planning to build that would have needed them never materialized. At this point, the only people I know who are doing anything with OG + Project are in the 1:1 case, so we might as well just embrace that and simplify things.
If/when someone needs the other kind of integration, we can revisit if we want to split that code out into a separate module within og_project or move to a whole separate project. The other approaches to OG + project might be better handled via #962554: Support for Organic Group anyway...
My only request is that any code blocks that actually assume 1:1 need to have a
// 1:1comment next to them so it's easier to untangle everything later should the need arise.I see that #962326: clean up project page is open, so we can actually fix the documentation there. So, I'm going to call this one fixed.
#2
Automatically closed -- issue fixed for 2 weeks with no activity.