You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on May 25, 2023. It is now read-only.
currently we can't fully enable versioning (including comparing revisions) for raptus.article since it uses Annotationstorage.
(see ticket https://dev.plone.org/ticket/11887)
some of our clients would love to have the same versioning features for raptus.article as they have for plone's stock document type.
i think this would required to either fix ticket/11887 or to migrate all raptus.article fields (or at least those that we need to be available in the revision comparision view) to attributestorage.
before i start to work on this, i'd love to hear your feedback on this. especially if you're pro or con such a change and if you see and drawbacks
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
iirc the main problem is, that for folderish types, annotationstorage is completely ignored since it contains information about the items contained in the folder (which cmfediton does not or can not take care of)
at that time, alec - being the author of the package - said that this will be a not trivial thing to do.
i did not yet had a look at the code to see if i can understand what's going on and where to hook in.
maybe we should try to get some people familiar with cmfeditions to take a look at this.
for raptus.article it might be more interesting to migrate to dexterity. dunno if versioning and diffs do work for dexterity types at all.
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
currently we can't fully enable versioning (including comparing revisions) for raptus.article since it uses Annotationstorage.
(see ticket https://dev.plone.org/ticket/11887)
some of our clients would love to have the same versioning features for raptus.article as they have for plone's stock document type.
i think this would required to either fix ticket/11887 or to migrate all raptus.article fields (or at least those that we need to be available in the revision comparision view) to attributestorage.
before i start to work on this, i'd love to hear your feedback on this. especially if you're pro or con such a change and if you see and drawbacks
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: