Incorrect Component Labels in the Components Dropdown [#954062]

=== Problem:

If a module defines several exportables, Features UI will show repeated items in the UI, which is confusing.

=== Example:

If workflow module defines workflow and workflow_type_map as two exportables, Features UI will show "Workflow" (module name) twice in the Edit Components dropdown

=== Cause:

Current features.admin.inc used module name as the component label in the components dropdown.

=== Solution:

Features UI should display "modulename: exportable name" instead of just "modulename" in the dropdown. That is what CTools Bulk Export UI does (see attached image) so such solution would make the two UIs coherent.

=== Code

Please see the attached minor patch which takes care of the problem.

Comment	File	Size	Author
#7	features_954062_component_labels.patch	752 bytes	hefox
#1	features-954062-1.patch	972 bytes	irakli
	Screen shot 2010-10-26 at 11.45.22 PM.png	13.39 KB	irakli

Comments

Comment #1

irakli commented 27 October 2010 at 03:54

Status:

Active

» Needs review

Status	File	Size
new	features-954062-1.patch	972 bytes

Comment #2

irakli commented 28 October 2010 at 20:52

Status:

Needs review

» Reviewed & tested by the community

Comment #3

pobster commented 30 November 2010 at 16:32

Status:

Reviewed & tested by the community

» Needs review

You can't mark your own patch as reviewed by the community... That's pointless...

I'm moving this back to 'needs review' and then maybe perhaps someone will review it.

Pobster

Comment #4

irakli commented 30 November 2010 at 18:43

Status:

Needs review

» Reviewed & tested by the community

Status was moved to R&TC based on a conversation with Jeff Miccolis, in IRC. Assuming he's one of the maintainers, I take the liberty to believe that there was a reason for it.

Comment #5

pobster commented 30 November 2010 at 19:38

Well seeing as it's been over a month, wouldn't you prefer that the community actually tested this? I mean, don't get me wrong here - I really don't care... But if you and the maintainer have already decided this patch is fine then why not move the status to "patch (to be ported)"? This patch evidently *hasn't* been tested by the community (you know what community means right?) therefore why mark it as such?

LOGIC != YOU

Pobster