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

Fix infolist entry label #12454

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Fix infolist entry label #12454

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

zepfietje
Copy link
Member

Description

Infolist entries of nested relationship attributes currently get a wrong label which is different from what a table column with the same name gets.

Column/entry name Table column label Infolist entry label
Before this fix generation.project.team.name Team Generation
After this fix generation.project.team.name Team Team

Functional changes

  • Code style has been fixed by running the composer cs command.
  • Changes have been tested to not break existing functionality.
  • Documentation is up-to-date.

@zepfietje zepfietje requested a review from danharrin April 23, 2024 10:39
@zepfietje zepfietje added the bug Something isn't working label Apr 23, 2024
@zepfietje zepfietje added this to the v3 milestone Apr 23, 2024
@danharrin
Copy link
Member

BC, also inconsistent with schema component labelling. In v4 these will be the same algo. I think table cols and infolist entries deserve different labels since entires go into much more depth and there could be more than one entry for the same relationship. Also JSON entries?

@danharrin danharrin closed this Apr 24, 2024
@danharrin danharrin deleted the fix-infolist-entry-label branch April 24, 2024 07:42
@zepfietje
Copy link
Member Author

I don't think this is a breaking change, rather a bug fix.

Which algorithm will be used in v4?

Personally I don't see why infolist entries and table columns are named inconsistently.
I do understand your remark about JSON entries, but still then the algorithm in this PR could work fine for most cases. Even if it didn't work correctly for JSON, usage of relationships is generally much higher than JSON fields I think.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working
Projects
Archived in project
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants