Reduce descriptions of default views

Good idea and suggestions. I don't understand what the backlinks view tries to be, but that's more in the name than the description I think. Anyway, my small edits would be:

Archive

A list of months that link to content for that month.

Backlinks

A list of content items that link to the content item.

Recent comments

A block and a page with recent comments.

Front page

Make the default Drupal front page a view.

Glossary

A list of all content, by letter.

Taxonomy term

Customize the default taxonomy/term display.

Tracker

Shows all new activity on the system.

Ah, excellent suggestion.

OH i like that!

A list of content items that link to the content item.

Yeah backlinks is pretty complicated. What about that?

A list of content items which have a link to the content item.

Good point. Well it is a view which shows how much you can achieve with a view, but i'm okay with removing that one.

As there is some test which checks this functionality we might just move it to that directory.

Excellent! Isn't CMI nice?

Two comments:

+++ b/core/modules/views/config/views.view.backlinks.ymlundefined
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ disabled: true
-description: 'Displays a list of nodes that link to the node, using the search backlinks table.'
+description: 'A list of content items which have a link to the content item.'

Maybe this one should be "A list of other content items which have a link to the content item"?

+++ b/core/modules/views/config/views.view.frontpage.ymlundefined
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ disabled: true
-description: 'Emulates the default Drupal front page; you may set the default home page path to this view to make it your front page.'
+description: 'Make the default Drupal front page a view.'

Let's leave this one out for now since we're majorly changing this view in #1806334: Replace the node listing at /node with a view. In that issue we can use text that describes what it actually is (a list of node teasers). I'll add a comment on that issue mentioning this.

1. That additional 'other' certainly helps. A lot even. Lets do that.
2. Ok lets leave it out here and improve it in #1806334: Replace the node listing at /node with a view

Per Comments 10 and 11 I created a patch that makes the changes in 1 and removes the changes for 2 (see comment 11).

My Patch plus and Interdiff is attached

+++ b/core/modules/views/config/views.view.tracker.ymlundefined
index 0000000..189ef8d
--- /dev/null

--- /dev/null
+++ b/sites/default/files/.htaccessundefined

+++ b/sites/default/files/.htaccessundefined
+++ b/sites/default/files/.htaccessundefined
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@

@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+SetHandler Drupal_Security_Do_Not_Remove_See_SA_2006_006

These changes shouldn't be part of the patch.

+++ b/sites/default/files/config/active_NI9pUGxo_SRO4GJW9nhMADeOiwjs2luD4ZWKE5RH_cw/.htaccessundefined
diff --git a/sites/default/files/config/active_NI9pUGxo_SRO4GJW9nhMADeOiwjs2luD4ZWKE5RH_cw/bartik.breakpoints.yml b/sites/default/files/config/active_NI9pUGxo_SRO4GJW9nhMADeOiwjs2luD4ZWKE5RH_cw/bartik.breakpoints.yml
index 0000000..501f417

--- /dev/null
+++ b/sites/default/files/config/active_NI9pUGxo_SRO4GJW9nhMADeOiwjs2luD4ZWKE5RH_cw/bartik.breakpoints.ymlundefined

+++ b/sites/default/files/config/active_NI9pUGxo_SRO4GJW9nhMADeOiwjs2luD4ZWKE5RH_cw/bartik.breakpoints.ymlundefined
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+mobile: '(min-width: 0px)'
+narrow: 'all and (min-width: 560px) and (max-width: 850px)'

This not at all as well, maybe you should redo your patch :)

Hemm... well I am new to drupal so forgive me if I went astray. I was following the basic instructions here http://drupalofficehours.org/task/1109 and of the mentor assigned to me.

Here is what I did:
I downloaded core
Created a branch
Applied the previous patch listed, then branched off edited the file to match the instructions in 11.
Created the patch and interdiff.

Somewhere I got lost? Did something wrong, because i only added and removed per comment 11?
Looks like I have to go back and fix it.

@ dawehner care to lend a hand tell me what I did wrong, I will be glad to fix it. If not I will give it a go on my own.

Thanks!
Least it passed!

OddJob: Looks as though 8.x may not have been up to date compared to the rerolled patch when the diff was created.

Something extra may have gotten added into your commits.

I would:

Git fetch/rebase 8.x
Git status to ensure no local files are changed from 8.x
Branch off to new branch and apply #8.
Git status to ensure just files changed in patch are changed and commit changes.
Branch again for new patch and make changes.
git status to ensure just your files changes and changed and commit changes.
Diff against 8.x for .patch and against branch for #8 for interdiff.

I've had this type of thing happen before and something odd just happened in my file structure i did see.

@Kbasarab thanks man, and a pleasure to meet and work with you at the Con. Thanks for you help then and now.

I will try that. I though I had the latest, but will go at it again and set speed to slow - that is take my time. I might have rushed through it or something and screwed up a step. I am going to list you under mentors to give you credit for all your help!!

Thanks again and I will try to knock this out by tomorrow.

This patch does what #12 does, minus the extraneous changes. Note: The interdiff is based on #8, not #12.

Generally, the shorter descriptions are looking better :)

+++ b/core/modules/views/config/views.view.backlinks.ymlundefined
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ disabled: true
+description: 'A list of other content items which have a link to the content item.'

Maybe : 'A list of content items that link to a piece of content.'

+++ b/core/modules/views/config/views.view.comments_recent.ymlundefined
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ disabled: true
+description: 'A block and a page with recent comments.'

Seems to start getting more inconsistent here, I like the 'A List ..' that's been added in the first two descriptions. Maybe we could add that in here too?

+++ b/core/modules/views/config/views.view.tracker.ymlundefined
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ disabled: true
+description: 'Shows all new activity on the system.'

Same here, 'A list ...'

I think the inconsistencies are a good thing here. If most descriptions start with 'A list…', then those first two words become redundant, and don't provide useful information anymore. At this stage in the Views UI, the idea that Views provides lists of stuff is implied and shouldn't have to be mentioned explicitly for each.

The first suggestion makes sense. I do think the 'other' word helps understanding what happens here. I suggest:

"A list of other content items that link to the content item."

Yeah, other works for me.

I think that either all or none should use 'list' in their descriptions. Do you mean it's implied in the other default view descriptions? or generally?

Generally. Not every description should have to communicate the general views capabiliyt of building lists of stuff. Insisting on 'either or all' takes away room to focus on how these default views differ from eachother.

Ok, but those defaults wont always be there :) If some modules aren't enabled, you won't see that default view ...

How about implementing hook_help() to say "Views makes lists of stuff."?

@Gaelan That is a good idea, and necessary (well reminded :))/ However, I don't think it's in the scope of this issue.

Created #1876904: Implement hook_help() for views.module and #1876906: Implement hook_help() for views_ui.module.

We aggreed that adding "A list of $foo" isn't really nice, though it helps to user figure out what views actually does.
At the same time for example the first view would be a good case where we expose the listing part, which could be probably "frontpage" as it will be one of the enabled ones.

As we can't know which strings will fit perfectly now, let's commit the current version, which for sure is already a big improvement and iterate after maybe some more user testing.

Looks good. Committed/pushed to 8.x.