Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

ISSUE-61: Remove node_type from drupal configs #62

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Aug 7, 2022
Merged

ISSUE-61: Remove node_type from drupal configs #62

merged 3 commits into from
Aug 7, 2022

Conversation

aksm
Copy link
Contributor

@aksm aksm commented Aug 5, 2022

Resolves #61

Will test in fresh deployment soon.

Copy link
Member

@DiegoPino DiegoPino left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Question! I see node_type removed from 2 blocks but not replaced with the the conditional. Not needed? Different approach? I feel I'm missing something (or knowledge). Can you explain? Thanks!

@@ -28,14 +28,6 @@ visibility:
bundles:
digital_object: digital_object
digital_object_collection: digital_object_collection
node_type:
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Wait! The replacement is missing here? I see the node_type gone but not new new Conditional?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Or am I missing something?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@DiegoPino Unless I'm misunderstanding, I'm assuming that the 'entity_bundle:node' just above it is the correct one since replacing just as the update hook does would make them identical, but I wanted to check in a deployment just to make sure I'm not missing something.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@aksm No worries, I was mistaken. I saw a bunch of lines removed and did not notice the good/new ones were already present. I will merge this

@DiegoPino DiegoPino merged commit f26f73b into esmero:1.0.0 Aug 7, 2022
@aksm aksm deleted the ISSUE-61 branch October 20, 2022 15:28
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants