- last update
about 1 year ago Build Successful - last update
about 1 year ago Build Successful - Status changed to Needs work
about 1 year ago 10:26am 15 January 2024 The Needs Review Queue Bot → tested this issue.
While you are making the above changes, we recommend that you convert this patch to a merge request → . Merge requests are preferred over patches. Be sure to hide the old patch files as well. (Converting an issue to a merge request without other contributions to the issue will not receive credit.)
- Status changed to Needs review
about 1 year ago 11:04am 15 January 2024 - 🇪🇸Spain interdruper
#25 missed update the function baseFieldDefinitions(). Re-rolled as #26 with the update.
- last update
about 1 year ago Build Successful - Status changed to Needs work
about 1 year ago 12:50am 16 January 2024 - 🇺🇸United States smustgrave
Issue summary should follow standard issue template.
Also will need test coverage.
- First commit to issue fork.
- 🇪🇸Spain vidorado Pamplona (Navarra)
I've created the MR and applied the patch from #27.
I believe the original post motivation is no longer an issue. Nowadays, nearly all DBs treat the VARCHAR() length as characters, not bytes. Perhaps in the old days when this issue was posted, it was bytes.
There has been motivation in this issue about a year ago, but I think that it was for the limited length of the subject field and not the multibyte problem.
I'm not pretty sure about what to test. I've made a couple of tests that check the maximum comment subject length limitation in action... but this behavior is common for all fields, so I'm a bit uneasy testing this only for the subject field and not for all fields, generally.
So, What do you think we should really test here @smustgrave?
