Follow-up to #1944572: Remove "ul.menu" dependency to prevent theme clashes
The current naming schema of book_tree is not like the plan in #1944572: Remove "ul.menu" dependency to prevent theme clashes and therefore need to be changed.
| Comment | File | Size | Author |
|---|---|---|---|
| #1 | Issue-2461691-bookmenu-template-suggestion-should-be.patch | 2.88 KB | hass |
Comments
Comment #1
hass commentedComment #2
star-szrI'm not sure I understand this, book-tree is a separate template, not a theme suggestion. This just makes things confusing IMO. What's the bug?
Comment #3
hass commentedIt does not use the same naming scheme you suggested in the other case. With this patch follows same naming.
This issue also goes back to the inflexible menu theming. This tree is a menu...
Comment #4
star-szrCheck this one out :)
Comment #7
hass commentedThis is still implementing the wrong theme suggestions... See the topic, please.
Comment #8
hass commentedComment #9
star-szr@hass that's why @joelpittet re-tested rather than closing the issue. This issue can still be worked on but the patch needs to be updated now that #2443361: Remove theme_book_link, make book tree align with MenuLinkTree build has been committed.
Comment #14
joelpittetThis would be nice if it could extend from the menu.html.twig, may be tricky to do this in a BC way, but could be possible if the markup stays the same and the suggestions are providing both.
Comment #19
nod_Comment #24
larowlanThis is going to be hard to do now without BC breaks. Someone has a custom theme with a book_tree implementation, but then it becomes menu__book__, we'd still have to use book__tree in order to pickup their template (and fire a deprecated notice) as well as fire any preprocessing for book_tree
It kind of feels like its not worth the effort now. If someone writing a theme wants to consolidate the two, they can use things like twig includes to simplify.
Thoughts on closing won't fix?
Comment #25
nod_+1, especially since book doesn't really have other changes planned for it.
Comment #26
larowlanPer #24 and #25