Announcing a new plugin for Rules.
It addes "developer comments" to Rules graphical language.
Sandbox link: http://drupal.org/sandbox/onkeltem/1719474
Initially I intended to call it just "Rules Comment" (and "comment" - in code), but after collecting some statistics in Rules' issue queue I thought this would produce misunderstanding, since "comment" most frequently means user comment from Drupal.
For this reason I called it "ui_comment" and under that name it is seen in UI.
I'm not sure anymore what name suits more, but now I dislike "ui_comment" too, thinking about changing name to "dev_comment".
Finally, I've come up to the feeling that I dislike any variant except "comment", since I want it to show up in UI exactly under this name: "add comment".
Unfortunately, Rules display "code" names in UI, not "titles" so I'm tied to use same name for UI and code.
Feedback is welcome.
Is it ok if I rename it to just "comment"?
Comment | File | Size | Author |
---|---|---|---|
#6 | Screen Shot 2012-08-13 at 11.04.41 AM.png | 45.59 KB | timb |
#4 | update_product_title_procedure.png | 168.77 KB | OnkelTem |
#3 | Editing action set %22Процедура обновления наименования товара%22 | МастерСталь.png | 168.77 KB | OnkelTem |
Screenshot from 2012-08-08 21:22:31.png | 42.2 KB | OnkelTem |
Comments
Comment #1
OnkelTem CreditAttribution: OnkelTem commentedComment #1.0
OnkelTem CreditAttribution: OnkelTem commentedUpdated issue summary.
Comment #2
timb CreditAttribution: timb commentedI'd like to see this functionality to make rules more readable. I think it should be titled 'rules code comments' or 'rules developer comments'
Comment #3
OnkelTem CreditAttribution: OnkelTem commented@timb
Yep, that's to what I've come up too:
1) The module is called now rules_dev_comments
2) Comment Rules Item is renamed to "comment"
See the screenshot of an update product title procedure. (UPDATE: d.org upload is broken. Will retry now)
Latest version is here:
http://drupal.org/sandbox/onkeltem/1719474
Comment #4
OnkelTem CreditAttribution: OnkelTem commentedComment #5
zhangtaihao CreditAttribution: zhangtaihao commentedThis almost strikes me as an attempt to reproduce what in Rules 6.x-1.x were the customized element labels. The idea back then was for the administrator to specify meaningful labels for specific elements.
Comment #6
timb CreditAttribution: timb commentedYes. I miss those customized element labels and found my way here. I now find myself using rulesets just so i can add titles to small procedures.
Comment #6.0
timb CreditAttribution: timb commentedUpdated issue summary.
Comment #7
TR CreditAttribution: TR commented"Needs review" is for patches that need review. This issue is just an announcement - no patch. I guess it's also an implicit request that this sandbox module code be put into core Rules?
Regardless, the sandbox exists, and you can install it if you find this feature useful. If it needs work, you can participate in the issue queue for the sandbox.
The code in the sandbox is very old and hasn't been maintained, so at this point it can't go directly into Rules. Also, D7 is pretty mature and we're not really adding new features anymore. Effort for development of new features should be directed to D8 at this point.
For all these reasons, I'm closing this issues as "won't fix", meaning this isn't going to be put into core Rules.