-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 73
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
improvements to i18n, pgsql compat and validations #28
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
The from and to fields were changed to start_at and end_at for postgresql compatibility. The forms have been updated for the new fields. The locales still call the fields "From" and "To" but are now referenced with :start_at and :end_at. The two fields were also change from date to datetime fields. I have not included an upgrade migration for either database change.
* Fixed data types on migration. * Removed uniqueness constraint on Event. * Fixed a bad ordering on Event.
fixed conflict with events#show needing new column names Conflicts: app/views/refinery/calendar/events/show.html.erb
there is no reason events can't have the same titles
validates start and end date are present, and in the logical order. It would seem to be the definition of an event - something that occurrs over a given time. So, it's resonable to require times.
@@ -12,8 +12,8 @@ Gem::Specification.new do |s| | |||
s.files = Dir["{app,config,db,lib,vendor}/**/*"] + ["readme.md"] | |||
|
|||
# Runtime dependencies | |||
s.add_dependency 'refinerycms-core', '~> 2.0.3' | |||
s.add_dependency 'refinerycms-core', '~> 2.0' |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
so you're saying this now works with all versions of Refinery up until 3.0?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
well of course - I can't know that - but I'd hope so :) With the ~> operator it seems to me no need to lock it down so much since we don't know if 2.1 will break this, so no need to force people in the future to deal with this dependency. Just depends on how conservative you prefer to be I guess, totally up to you.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I am wildly conservative ;-) I've been bitten way too many times in the past.
@sbeam OK So this PR effectively replaces #25 and maybe #27 is that right? /cc @Tranquility @jeremiahishere @luis-mendo @brenes? Sorry for the massive delay :( |
It only replaces #25. The translation commits only deal with static strings but do not allow the user to add multiple descriptions for different languages. |
@Tranquility thanks! |
+1 since the current master is broken on PostgreSQL (and supposedly SQLite, too). |
with #38 merged master should be compatible again with Postgre and SQLite |
this is some various stuff in one PR, but it's a worthy one IMO.
tests should pass