- last update
over 1 year ago Patch Failed to Apply - πͺπΈSpain penyaskito Seville π, Spain πͺπΈ, UTC+2 πͺπΊ
That also needed to happen in tests.
Fixed that, and the method signature forces us to return something (usually the event itself). This should be green.Next step should be fixing the php10 deprecation warnings.
- last update
over 1 year ago 29,343 pass, 1 fail - πͺπΈSpain penyaskito Seville π, Spain πͺπΈ, UTC+2 πͺπΊ
That was the interdiff only... not even properly named.
The last submitted patch, 73: 2873287-content-moderation-events-72.patch, failed testing. View results β
- last update
over 1 year ago Custom Commands Failed - πͺπΈSpain penyaskito Seville π, Spain πͺπΈ, UTC+2 πͺπΊ
Rewritten the test based on π InvocationMocker::withConsecutive() is deprecated in PHPUnit 9.6 and removed from PHPUnit 10 RTBC . Added a todo if this lands before that one. No deprecations anymore.
I feel like writing tests will be even harder now :-( - last update
over 1 year ago 29,360 pass - πͺπΈSpain penyaskito Seville π, Spain πͺπΈ, UTC+2 πͺπΊ
Mostly code standards, but I changed an exactly(5) to any() in previous patch and I reverted that back.
- Status changed to Needs work
over 1 year ago 1:45am 27 April 2023 - πͺπΈSpain penyaskito Seville π, Spain πͺπΈ, UTC+2 πͺπΊ
Per #39 still NW.
- Status changed to Needs review
about 1 year ago 9:03am 11 October 2023 - last update
about 1 year ago Custom Commands Failed - π¨πSwitzerland berdir Switzerland
Just another rebase, conflict on the save method changes.
- Status changed to Needs work
about 1 year ago 3:54pm 11 October 2023 - πΊπΈUnited States smustgrave
Updated remaining tasks to include #39 + change record.
- πͺπΈSpain willeaton
Hi, I was looking for this functionality, its great for being informed of a transition event, but what about being able to veto the transition?
Use case: Product publication.
A user wants to validate a product ready for publication. The system needs to check that the product is really ready. Maybe they haven't filled in all the required fields for publication (fields which cannot be required to create the initial entity/node). Maybe they haven't prepared related content which is required for publication.
The system should be able to validate certain data before allowing the product to pass to a validated state.
Previously we used the "Workflow" module but we decided against it because the module doesn't seem to be maintained and the code base is still in a state of temporary migration from Drupal 7 style code. Content Moderation seemed to be the more accepted option however it is limited in this respect.
- πΊπΈUnited States dww
@willeaton: You might find State Machine β suitable for your needs. It provides / supports "Guards" which are plugins you can define to prevent specific state transitions if certain conditions are not met. But we're getting a bit off topic from this issue.
I also needed something like this for a project, but this issue seems a potentially doomed in deadlock between release manager and subsystem maintainer. I'm not sure I can be more persuasive than what @Sam152 already said in #40 and #45. Yes, a mix of hooks and events is somewhat crappy DX, but so is the current situation. I'm not sure how we provide 100% BC without a mix of both unless we want to make
ContentModerationState
public API. Drupal seems to love to provide a lot of different ways to alter the same thing π so I'm not totally convinced that having both Events and hooks is really all that terrible. π+1 to doing this. If I can find more time for a direct (and hopefully persuasive) response to every point in #39, I'll try.