Closed (fixed)
Project:
D7 Media
Version:
7.x-2.x-dev
Component:
Code
Priority:
Normal
Category:
Bug report
Assigned:
Unassigned
Reporter:
Created:
12 Feb 2020 at 11:34 UTC
Updated:
6 Apr 2020 at 15:54 UTC
Jump to comment: Most recent, Most recent file
Comments
Comment #2
fjgarlin commentedComment #3
fjgarlin commentedPatch attached.
Comment #4
fjgarlin commentedComment #5
joseph.olstadlooks good, but I haven'T tested it yet.
Comment #6
guypaddock commentedThis should also handle similar logic for the
file_entitymodule a few lines further up. Right now, even with this patch applied, I am still seeing this error:We're pulling file entity dev in via GIT.
Comment #7
joseph.olstadentity_translation 1.0 has been out for a long time now, and 1.1 came out recently, it's been a long time since beta6, so I think we could just remove these entity_translation checks in the hook_requirements
submit me a new patch that removes ONLY the entity_translation checks in this hook_requirements, and I'll put it in.
otherwise, feel free to doctor up the latest patch and make the warning go away.
either way works for me.
Comment #8
fjgarlin commentedThis would be the new patch addressing #7.
For the issue also reported in #6, we cannot apply the same logic as there is no fallback value. We could regex compare on the version to see if the version is correct or allowed, but I'm not entirely sure of how the regex would look like as we want "7.x-2.0" and above but not "7.x-2.0-beta/alpha/...". I guess it'll be a fix between regex and number comparisons. As I'm not sure about how that would look like I'm just addressing #7.
Comment #9
fjgarlin commented@GuyPaddock this is an attempt to check the (correct) version for "file_entity". It checks version and creates a made up value for the date so that it passes or fail the test under.
So it contains suggestions from #6 and #7.
@joseph.olstad #8 would only remove the "entity_translation" requirements. #9 would do that and also fix the "file_entity" warning.
Comment #10
joseph.olstadok thanks for this, looks good
Comment #14
joseph.olstadComment #15
guypaddock commentedProps to @fjgarlin for addressing #6, and props to @joseph.olstad for getting this in. Thank you both!