It would be great for a lot of different reasons to have YYYY, MM, and DD available as tokens... File's for one could benefit.

Files: 

Comments

emok’s picture

Title:Add support for YYYY, MM, and DD» Another patch
StatusFileSize
new2.92 KB

I agree. But I had previously implemented this using the same kind of date tokens as in token_node.inc, which I think is better than having two different sets of date tokens (you used uppercase letters).
Attached pach applies to version 6.x-1.10, but with adjusted line numbers the same patch works for the 5.x-version.
The help texts about the new tokens (e.g. [site-date-yyyy]) do not appear in pathauto where I use them, but they work if you try to use them.

emok’s picture

Title:Another patch» Add support for date parts YYYY, MM, and DD

Sorry for changing the title, perhaps better now?

dopry’s picture

Status:Active» Needs review

@emok, nice update... code looks good... maybe we can get a maintainer to check it out...

brunodbo’s picture

StatusFileSize
new2.92 KB

I applied the patch to the 5.x-version of token.module (5.x patch attached). I tried the new date tokens with the filefield.module, to create a /files/yyyy/mm/ directory structure. Works great.

dopry’s picture

Status:Needs review» Reviewed & tested by the community

*poke*

ar-jan’s picture

Works great (D6), thanks for the patch. Any idea if it is possible to use the submit date of a node as a token?

ekes’s picture

Tested (with token 5.x-1.11) and support the patch.

It's lovely when you think your going to have to write something and you find someone has done it already - cheers!

eaton’s picture

marking this for commit later -- I'll run it by greggles too, but these make sense and they're good ones to use for directory building,etc.

greggles’s picture

Seems quite reasonable to me.

AdrianB’s picture

I applied the patch i #4 manually and it works great. (Note to self: learn to patch.)

eaton’s picture

Status:Reviewed & tested by the community» Fixed

Committed to the D6 branch -- I'll be applying it to the D5 branch later today. Thanks!

Anonymous’s picture

Status:Fixed» Closed (fixed)

Automatically closed -- issue fixed for two weeks with no activity.

ksenzee’s picture

Status:Closed (fixed)» Active

Did this ever get applied to the D5 branch? I don't see it there but maybe I'm overlooking something.

yan’s picture

Same question here. I'm using Drupal 5.x and I can't use node tokens (with imagefield). Has that feature been backported?

yan’s picture

Ok, answering my own question: I reviewed the 5.x-1.11 version's code and also the 5.x-1.x-dev version's code and found that the patch from #4 hasn't been committed. I also tested the patch against 5.x-1.11 and it seems to work without any problems.

Is there anything that keeps the patch from being committed?

yan’s picture

Since more than half a year there is a patch for the 5.x version that works but hasn't been committed. Is there any reason for that?

ckng’s picture

Status:Active» Reviewed & tested by the community

*bump*
patch not committed for D5 & D6.

yan’s picture

Bumping this again after three weeks without an answer. Could somebody at least say why the patch still hasn't been comitted for 5.x-1.x?

greggles’s picture

Status:Reviewed & tested by the community» Fixed

Thanks @emok and @brunodbo. Now committed to 5.x as well http://drupal.org/cvs?commit=195330

@ckng - the patch is committed to 6.x (see here). It is not in HEAD because eaton prefers not to use HEAD.

@yan - lack of round tuits. You could help increase the number of round tuits by cleaning up the duplicates and support requests in issue queue.

yan’s picture

Thanks greggles! I'll see what I can do to help out the next time. My problem was that I didn't even know why the patch hadn't been comitted (and I don't know much about developement processes).

Status:Fixed» Closed (fixed)

Automatically closed -- issue fixed for 2 weeks with no activity.