Re: Status update on "new" website, testing needed

Hi!

Robert Treat wrote:
> Are you interested in nit picking or should we just wait on that and/or
> submit patches ourselves? For example, I like the layout of the old
> news admin interface better.... id number,date,headline,yes/no on status
> info, translations,edit,delete being more boxy and filling up browser
> page... obviously a minor thing but would be nice.

This is controlled by the templates in portal/template/admin

Yes, feel free to provide patches. ;]

> Another thing I was wondering about. Once an article is translated, if
> someone goes back in and edits the original article, should it mark the
> article as not translated? That is how I did it on the advocacy site...
> well, actually I kept track of it the item was either new (never
> translated) or stale (needed updating but had been translated.)

Oh, you are right here.

I think a timestamp is needed in the table containing texts and a trigger to
change that on update. Then it'll be possible to check whether the master was
modified after the translation and mark this fact.

> On the doc comment interface, what is the difference between rejected
> and deleted? Maybe that's not the right question... when would I want to
> reject a comment and not delete it? Also we used to be able to edit
> comments on the doc page themselves which was handy to see the comment
> in context, any chance we can still do that?

Deleted comments are, um, deleted.
Rejected are marked but kept in the DB, they are obviously not shown on the site.

If you feel that it's not needed, I'll leave only the 'delete' option.

I didn't see anything for editing the comments in the current site's code, BTW.

> Oh, and one other thing, how do we add a new language? I'd like to walk
> through that process if I could.

Manually, by adding the language to the array[s] in
portal/system/global/languages.php

> Hmm... since none of the above are bugs... go to documentation section
> and click on the FAQ/PDF links, I notice they are broken. :-) Otherwise
> everything else seemed pretty functional... great job

That's once again a content issue. ;]