WIP: ERP5 Property Annotate and History using DiffTool
Being able to show history for properties as well as annotate(similar to git blame) for the text contents in ERP5 objects.
-
Edited
TODO :
- Property name not displayed properly for Property History View in new UI and after pagination move in old UI.
- Remove redundancy for base_data and data.
-
Fix for
categoriesproperty as they are not stored in expected way in Historical Revisions. - Gadget for links in History Tab for new UI (or maybe make them an action).
-
The initial diff for a not None property should always be
Base_addDialogwhere the old status is empty. - Add link to show complete change for a History View on Property History Listbox items.
Improvements:
- Not showing the empty properties creates the problem for the case when properties were not None in the past.
- Some properties from propertyItems are available as categories getter in the Historical Dict, so these are also not available.
-
64 64 <td>A new foo</td> 65 65 </tr> 66 66 67 <tr> 68 <td>waitForElementPresent</td> 69 <td>//textarea[@name='field_my_lines_list']</td> -
lines with s ? it looks like a field not following naming convention.
-
my_lines_listcome from Base_viewWebFieldLibrary/lines_feld. Here, this is a proxy to that field. Also I think we uselinesin other place also (for example in standard property). -
I checked a bit to see, seems like we use
my_lines_listquite often in the test bts (erp5_ui_testanderp5_renderjs_ui_test) Search -
I think this is because the fields is named
LinesField(it's formulator naming) and these tests are tests for this field so they match the name.
Also, I believe the field from field library are "technical template fields" so they are named like the fields .
For ERP5 properties and fields we usually never use s, but use
_listor_setdepending on the type.If this fiels is to display a list of "things",
my_thing_listis the preferred naming. -
Ah I see. Makes sense. The lines I added in the test also is for lines field(the field was already existing, I just added to check if the element is present), so I think there is no need to change the name as long as they are based on
Linesfield.Or do we prefer to change all of them in the tests to
my_line_list? (seems like there are just 24, so I am ok with pushing a predecessor commit to master changing their names). -
Ah I get it now. This test is modifying a
Fooand it's the default testing form named like this... sorry for noise it's perfectly fine in this context.I just saw this field in the diff and it looked suspicious.
-
-
A minot suggestion: If it's blame as it git blame, can we use something less negative than blame ? for example git blame can also be used as "git annotate".
-
If it's blame as it git blame, can we use something less negative than blame ? for example git blame can also be used as "git annotate".
Yeah, its similar as
blamein git.Annonateseems like a better name. I'll use it. Thanks -
Changed title: WIP: ERP5 Property Blame and History using DiffTool → WIP: ERP5 Property Annotate and History using DiffTool
Toggle commit list -
added 88 commits
-
92e906d6...99e67338 - 85 commits from branch
nexedi:master - 2471a65d - [erp5_core] Revert view for Historical Comparison.
- 94349f9d - [erp5_core] Use DiffTool to display historical revision diff
- 95352144 - [erp5_core] Add ERP5 Property History
Toggle commit list -
92e906d6...99e67338 - 85 commits from branch
-
added 1 commit
- 5eac0483 - [erp5_core]: Add functions for property history in ZODB History component
Toggle commit list -
-
Please register or sign in to post a comment