[4.0] Workflow Transitions/Stages

[brianteeman]

1. Change the editor field to a text field - I am sure you will never need a full wysiwyg editor here
2. Add a label to the field called "Note"
3. change the tmpl to get the list of fields from the xml instead of being hardcoded
4. Add the content of the "note" to the list view. I really can't see the point in having the note if you can't see it in the list

(Same has been done for stages)

After

[wilsonge]

You've added some extra tabs here

[wilsonge]

Can we indent the fieldset here if we're squeezing in the <fields> element please

[wilsonge]

LGTM. Let's just get one test here

[brianteeman]

Moved the name above the tabs for consistency

[brianteeman]

Something isnt correct here - probably a silly error by me - but the edit is not displaying the note or saving correctly. I will take another look in the morning unless some kind sole wants to submit a pr to my branch with the fix

[wilsonge]

You've added the fields tag. So the fields names have changed to e.g. jform[transition][description] instead of jform[description] before this PR. So you'll need to update the populateState function I would imagine

joomla-cms/administrator/components/com_workflow/Model/TransitionModel.php

Lines 39 to 48 in 51ea31b

	public function populateState()
	{
	parent::populateState();
	$app = Factory::getApplication();
	$context = $this->option . '.' . $this->name;
	$extension = $app->getUserStateFromRequest($context . '.filter.extension', 'extension', 'com_content', 'cmd');
	$this->setState('filter.extension', $extension);
	}

(just doing this off code review - please check what i've written before attempting anything)

[brianteeman]

Makes sense. Will check in the morning

[brianteeman]

And probably the getState

[brianteeman]

OK now updated for stages and ready for testing

[brianteeman]

@bembelimen I think this is clearer in the edit view and also means you can see all the notes at once in the list view - hope you agree

[bembelimen]

In general I really like this PR, but two things:

• perhaps move the note field to the right?
• What is the reason for grouping the fields into the "transitions fields"? Will this be extended in some way, so we need the foreach in the tmpl? I would suggest to use fieldset only, so we have not this nested field naming George mentioned.

[brianteeman]

perhaps move the note field to the right?

I assume you mean in the list view? It is below to be consistent with similar additional information on other lists - also allows a bit more space and if it was to wrap onto a second line it will look better this way

[wilsonge]

What is the reason for grouping the fields into the "transitions fields"? Will this be extended in some way, so we need the foreach in the tmpl? I would suggest to use fieldset only, so we have not this nested field naming George mentioned.

We don't have nested fields anymore with this (that's when you use a "fields" tag) this just names the fieldsets, which is required for allowing plugins to add more custom fields (for example see what I've done with the groups view in #21696)

[bembelimen]

No I mean in the form view.

[bembelimen]

@wilsonge But there is a difference: you add the name to the fieldset, here we added a new "fields" tag: https://github.com/joomla/joomla-cms/pull/21592/files#diff-6d3a9c00497a5503546ac43bbad8023eR10

[brianteeman]

1. Note - i think thats a just a matter of opinion - I dont care and am happy to move it
2. Fields - my fault - didnt save the change - have pushed now

[brianteeman]

conflicts resolved

[bembelimen]

Perhaps we should add $this->escape(...) here, too?

[brianteeman]

i was following your code style above for title

[brianteeman]

@wilsonge please advise

[brianteeman]

fixed

[wilsonge]

Thanks!