Edit hook_help text for Workflows module

Have added the uses section along with the link to the documentation.

Re-roll

I will work on this.

I started again from scratch as #6 suggested so I just added the Uses section and make the description fit one sentence. I moved part of the description to the Uses section because it seems to fit there.

#8 looks good to me. Applied the patch it worked cleanly. Please see before and after screen. small grammar correction needed, I have created a patch for it. "a UI" to "an UI".

As suggested in remaiing task 1 and 2 are done in the patch. 3rd, I think is not neccesary to be changed as suggested in #13 because it's an external URL. Please review and suggest.

1. +++ b/core/modules/workflows/workflows.info.yml
   @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
   +description: 'Workflow module allows you to create multi-state process to review before content to be published.'
   

   This isn't actually true, workflows has no relationship to content. The workflows plugin in content_moderation is what introduces those semantics.

2. +++ b/core/modules/workflows/workflows.module
   @@ -27,7 +27,13 @@ function workflows_help($route_name, RouteMatchInterface $route_match) {
   +      $output .= '<p>' . t('The Workflows module provides an UI and an API for creating multi-state process per user role to check what user is posting before publishing the content. For more information, see the <a href=":workflow">online documentation for the Workflows module</a>.', [':workflow' => 'https://www.drupal.org/documentation/modules/workflows']) . '</p>';
   +      $output .= '<h3>' . t('Uses') . '</h3>';
   +      $output .= '<dl>';
   +      $output .= '<dt>' . t('Allows you to manage workflow with states and transitions.') . '</dt>';
   +      $output .= '<dt>' . t('For example - a digital newspaper in which the editors make their articles, but they have to pass before by a supervisor to be published.') . '</dt>';
   

   Same here.

Have made the changes as required. Please review.

Uploading the interdiff..

Any updates with the issue?

I have gone through it @ifrik and do let me know where I am making any error ...

Hi all
The patch contains following changes
1) change in short description from above patch
2) change in use in help page
3) change in url
I am also attaching the interdiff
@ifrik sorry i missed your last comment , if still inaccurate please provide correct patch.

Thanks

Rerolled the patch.

#30 worked fine for me.

@Yogesh Your patch applied successfully and working fine

> Add the Uses section

I don't see this in the patch.

(BTW @amietpatial there is no need to take screenshots of a patch applying correctly to the code.)

Hi,

I have created a new patch with Uses and one liner short description on extend page.

Thanks,

I added the DrupalEurope and Novice tag. The patch needs work to address the helpful reviews by @ifrik and @joachim in #33, #34 and #38.

As suggested by #41, remove the module description & only keep the hook_help in this issue.

Tagging for upcoming contribution days.

Alfredo and Jason, user jayzee we are trying to work on this at DrupalCon 2019 Seattle

(Our mentor mentioned this may not be the best issue to start working with, as Novice, so I will do no further work on this one)

Tagging for DrupalNorth 2019

Setting back to Needs Review & above test fails are not related.

1. Thanks for working on this. This one is super tricky because on it's own the module does nothing.

2. +++ b/core/modules/workflows/workflows.module
   @@ -15,13 +16,18 @@ function workflows_help($route_name, RouteMatchInterface $route_match) {
   +      $output .= '<dd>' . t('A workflow requires at least two states. For a content workflow, this could for example be an additional <em>Draft</em> state in addition to the default publication states. States can be added when you add or edit a workflow on the <a href=":worksflows">Worksflows page</a>.', [':worksflows' => Url::fromRoute('entity.workflow.collection')->toString()]) . '</dd>';
   

   I think we can remove For a content workflow, this could for example be an additional <em>Draft</em> state in addition to the default publication states. entirely. It's wordy and feels like it is in the weeds.

3. +++ b/core/modules/workflows/workflows.module
   @@ -15,13 +16,18 @@ function workflows_help($route_name, RouteMatchInterface $route_match) {
   +      $output .= '<dd>' . t('A transitions defines which in which state a config or content item can be save as next. It has one destination state, but can have several states <em>from</em> which the transition can be applied. Transitionss can be added when you add or edit a workflow on the <a href=":worksflows">Worksflows page</a>.', [':worksflows' => Url::fromRoute('entity.workflow.collection')->toString()]) . '</dd>';
   

   I think we should remove a config or content item that's an assumption the Workflows module doesn't make.

   A transitions should be A transition.

   Later on there's a Transitionss

4. +++ b/core/modules/workflows/workflows.module
   @@ -15,13 +16,18 @@ function workflows_help($route_name, RouteMatchInterface $route_match) {
   +      $output .= '<dt>' . t('Configuring workflows further') . '</dt>';
   +      $output .= '<dd>' . t('Depending on the installed workflow type, you can also configure to which entities the workflow applies, and what its default state is.') . '</dd>';
   

   This is totally dependent on the module that implements the workflow type. I think all we can say is that particular workflow types might have additional options on here. But I feel it is the responsibility of the module that provides the workflow type to document this.

There is also a typo in the ":moderiation" link, which is broken,
and here "A transitions defines which in which state"

This one took into account suggestions #59 2,3,4

As #59 2,3,4 and #60 suggesstions were taken into account, and the broken link has been removed, I guess I can push it to RTBC !

One thing I've been pondering is if we should have any of this. Looking at content_moderation_help() that's the useful documentation. And maybe should be expanded to its specific case.

Setting back to RTBC because above test fails are unrelated.

Tried to fix CCF for #80.

Converted to an MR and made some tweaks.

Had to apply locally to fully read it but addition adding a check for content_moderation seems like a great idea.

Attaching a diff of the last patch with the MR.

Committed and pushed ae308e40f0 to 11.x and 564afc4ea5 to 10.4.x. Thanks!