Closed (fixed)
Project:
Node Comments
Version:
6.x-2.x-dev
Component:
Code
Priority:
Normal
Category:
Task
Assigned:
Unassigned
Issue tags:
Reporter:
Created:
26 May 2009 at 05:44 UTC
Updated:
3 Jan 2014 at 00:29 UTC
Jump to comment: Most recent, Most recent file
Comments
Comment #6
merlinofchaos commentedComment #7
robbiethegeek commentedHa ha. I just got a request for signatures on the branch with this version of nodecomment for signatures. Can the old school way of grabbing signatures and prepopulating the node form, and ignoring that if signatures for forums is enabled.
Comment #8
merlinofchaos commentedMan, that'll get ugly, I think. It may be possible, but...
Comment #9
merlinofchaos commentedWe definitely have an argument that the preprocess functions patch wasn't fully thought through, in terms of how it would affect DX. Perhaps this is my fault, as I was so busy on other stuff that as the only person with real objections to that patch, I didn't feel like standing up and being the guy blocking the patch, and so I put fairly minimal effort into it.
That said, the DX WTF here is mighty, I think, so either a rollback should happen, or this. The problem is, 'this' can only happen if there is a reasonable likelihood of it making it in. The actual patch is likely to be tedious to create.
Comment #10
merlinofchaos commentedSigh. #9 on wrong issue. I hate how I do that.
Comment #11
andrewlevine commentedTurns out D6 made signatures dynamic. As a result, we can add signatures to node comment relatively easily and let core handle that actual signature creation. Attached is the patch.
Comment #12
zroger commentedThis is definitely the right direction to go with this issue.
I haven't actually tested the patch, but it looks good at first glance.
Comment #13
tom_o_t commentedCommitted patch. Thanks!