CoreCommunity ExtensionsIncubatorDistributionsTYPO3 4.5 ProjectsTYPO3 4.6 ProjectsTYPO3 4.7 ProjectsTYPO3 6.0 ProjectsTYPO3 6.1 ProjectsTYPO3 6.2 Projects (+)

Feature #29301

disabledOperations vs excludedOperations

Added by Sy Moen over 1 year ago. Updated 11 months ago.

Status:Closed Start date:2011-08-27
Priority:Could have Due date:
Assignee:Francois Suter % Done:

100%

Category:Import process
Target version:2.0.0
Votes: 0

Description

This confused me to no end at first, and I came across it in the code again, so... here's the suggestion:

TERMS:
disabledOperations:
--> context: ['tx_my_table']['ctrl']['external']['index']
--> Basically it means that all the fields in this index for this table should not update / insert / delete depending on how this is set.

excludedOperations:
--> context: ['column']['external']
--> This is a per column exclude that denies update / insert depending on the setting.

SUGGESTION:
The terms 'excluded' and 'disabled' can be semantically identical, especially in a coding context. So, I would suggest both the identifiers be renamed thus:

tableDisabledOperations
columnDisabledOperations

...so as to distinguish context specifically. Either that, or call them both the same thing, but make the point that there are two contexts for the identifier.

OFFER:
If this is desirable, I can make the changes and submit a patch(s).

Associated revisions

Revision 62628
Added by Francois Suter about 1 year ago

Replaced excludedOperations by disabledOperations for naming consistency, resolves #29301

Revision 62628
Added by Francois Suter about 1 year ago

Replaced excludedOperations by disabledOperations for naming consistency, resolves #29301

History

Updated by Francois Suter over 1 year ago

You're right. This was an unfortunate choice.

I agree that they should be named the same. I would go for calling them both "disabledOperations", because this term has been around for much longer.

I'll gladly accept a patch. Just mind that "excludedOperations" should still be accepted for backwards-compatibility, but a warning could be displayed in the BE module.

Updated by Francois Suter about 1 year ago

  • Status changed from New to Accepted
  • Assignee set to Francois Suter

Updated by Francois Suter about 1 year ago

  • Status changed from Accepted to Resolved
  • % Done changed from 0 to 100

Applied in changeset r62628.

Updated by Francois Suter 11 months ago

  • Status changed from Resolved to Closed

Also available in: Atom PDF