Contrib.social

Provide users with the option to select an appropriate moderation state when reverting to a previous revision

Open on Drupal.org →
Created on 4 September 2017, almost 7 years ago
Updated 26 June 2024, 2 days ago

Problem/Motivation

When reverting to a previous revision of an item of content, the new revision created matches the moderation state of the revision being reverted.

While this keeps the integrity of the workflow intact, since content can only be recreated in a state that was valid at some previous point in time, it may not always be what users expect and it limits the utility of reverting in general, since certain revisions can only be recreated and immediately published or can only be recreated and reverted back to a draft.

Proposed resolution

A few proposals have been made to address this issue:

@catch in #17 (paraphrasing):

  • Only allow reverts to default revisions
  • Alter the access for the revert action to also require some kind of content_moderation permission
  • Leave it as is, but probably with some messaging

@jhedstrom in #18:

  • Could we simply add the moderation select list to the revert confirmation form?

@Sam152 in #30:

  • Building on adding a moderation select list to the revert screen, but introducing additional permissions for reverting to each state.

Remaining tasks

Agree and implement an approach.

User interface changes

API changes

Data model changes

✨ Feature request
Status

Needs work

Version

11.0 🔥

Component
Content moderation  →

Last updated 1 day ago

Created by

🇬🇧United Kingdom catch

Live updates comments and jobs are added and updated live.
  • Needs usability review

    Used to alert the usability topic maintainer(s) that an issue significantly affects (or has the potential to affect) the usability of Drupal, and their signoff is needed. When adding this tag, make it easy to review the issue. Make sure the issue summary describes the problem and the proposed solution. Screenshots usually help a lot! To get sign-off on issues with the "Needs usability review" tag, post about them in the #ux channel on Drupal Slack, and/or attend a UX meeting to demo the patch and get direct feedback from designers/UX folks/product management on next steps. If an issue represents a significant new feature, UI change, or change to the general "user experience" of Drupal, use Needs product manager review instead. See the scope of responsibilities for product managers.

  • Needs issue summary update

    Issue summaries save everyone time if they are kept up-to-date. See Update issue summary task instructions.

Sign in to follow issues

Merge Requests

Comments & Activities

Not all content is available!

It's likely this issue predates Contrib.social: some issue and comment data are missing.

  • Comment over 1 year ago →
    🇦🇺Australia acbramley

    Fixed the failure. I don't think #65 is valid considering we have tests covering this functionality.

  • Comment over 1 year ago →
    System Message

    The last submitted patch, 76: 2906568-76.patch, failed testing. View results →

  • Comment over 1 year ago →
    🇦🇺Australia acbramley

    Fixed comparison of strings vs FormattableMarkup, added return types.

  • Comment about 1 year ago →
    🇧🇴Bolivia manuvelasco Bolivia

    The patch on #78 works for me just for sites without translate content enabled, that is because the route for content with translation is node.revision_revert_translation_confirm so we should also add a form for these cases and assign it to the mentioned route.

  • Status changed to Needs work about 1 year ago
  • Comment about 1 year ago →
    🇺🇸United States smustgrave

    This would be a great feature to have. Can we update the issue summary with the agreed upon solution though?

    Also have posted in the #ux for usability review so hopefully happens soon.

  • First commit to issue fork.
  • Merge request !5696Issue #2906568: Provide users with the option to select an appropriate moderation state when reverting to a previous revision → (Open) created by mstrelan
  • Comment 7 months ago →
    🇦🇺Australia mstrelan

    Re-rolled and created MR against 11.x

  • Comment 7 months ago →
    🇦🇺Australia mstrelan

    Had the same thought as #51, this is very specific to nodes and I'm not sure it needs to be.

  • Comment 7 months ago →
    🇦🇺Australia acbramley

    Re #85 - it doesn't need to be but we are quite a way off using the generic UI for Nodes.

  • Comment 6 months ago →
    🇳🇿New Zealand ericgsmith

    Adding patch of MR5696 at commit 3ba5a1a1 for anybody needing a stable patch against 10.2

  • Comment about 1 month ago →
    🇨🇦Canada jlongbottom

    When I revert a revision to Draft, it is updating the published SQL table for my field (eg: paragraph__field_X), as well as creating a new row in the revisions table (paragraph_revision__field_X). This does not happen when you make a new draft - only when you revert to a draft.

    I noticed this because I have some custom code elsewhere that is manually querying the non-revision SQL table for my field and I was surprised to find the reverted draft values instead of the published values.

    It looks like we call prepareRevertedRevision which is hard-coded to $revision->isDefaultRevision(TRUE);. Is this correct? Seems like it should be false if reverting to a draft.

  • Comment about 1 month ago →
    🇨🇦Canada jlongbottom

    When I revert a revision to Draft, it is updating the published SQL table for my field (eg: paragraph__field_X), as well as creating a new row in the revisions table (paragraph_revision__field_X). This does not happen when you make a new draft - only when you revert to a draft.

    I noticed this because I have some custom code elsewhere that is manually querying the non-revision SQL table for my field and I was surprised to find the reverted draft values instead of the published values.

    It looks like we call prepareRevertedRevision which is hard-coded to $revision->isDefaultRevision(TRUE);. Is this correct? Seems like it should be false if reverting to a draft.

  • Comment 29 days ago →
    🇨🇦Canada jlongbottom

    That seemed to have fixed the issue for me. Attached is my patch.

  • Comment 29 days ago →
    🇨🇦Canada jlongbottom

    Patch updated with translation support

  • Comment 29 days ago →
    🇨🇦Canada jlongbottom

    Updated route subscriber to work on multilingual sites

  • Comment 2 days ago →
    🇫🇷France opi

    Anyone else struggling to patch against 10.3.0 ?

  • Comment 2 days ago →
    🇦🇺Australia mstrelan

    @opi I've attached the patch we're using for 10.3.0, but I have set it to hidden so as not to confuse this issue further. This is based on the patch in #87 as that's what we were previously using and I haven't reviewed 89-91, which don't have interdiffs and aren't in sync with the MR.

  • Comment 2 days ago →
    🇫🇷France opi

    @mstrelan Thanks a lot ! I wasn't brave enough to rebase a 21KB patch last evening <3

contrib.social Blog FAQ Discussions
Production build 0.69.0 2024