Version comments, Preview, and Published "bug"
Permalink
I like to add a Version comment when I edit a page so that my collaborators can see what I have changed.
This works OK if I "Publish My Edits"; however, if I "Preview my Edits" and then later Approve the edits using the momentary pop-up notice, my comments are replaced with "New version x".
If I edit the page again and make no changes, simply saying "Exit edit mode" the page gets approved silently and my comments are replaced with "New version x".
If instead, I edit the previewed page again and make a minor change and then "Publish my Edits", the page gets a new version with the comments set to "New version x+1".
Also, sometimes the version comment gets set to "New version x" and sometimes to simply "Version x".
Note: approving a previewed page from the dashboard site-map does preserve the version comment.
It seems to me that the page version and version comments for a previewed page should not change until after I publish or approve it.
I also don't think a page should be approved unless I intentionally approve or publish it.
This works OK if I "Publish My Edits"; however, if I "Preview my Edits" and then later Approve the edits using the momentary pop-up notice, my comments are replaced with "New version x".
If I edit the page again and make no changes, simply saying "Exit edit mode" the page gets approved silently and my comments are replaced with "New version x".
If instead, I edit the previewed page again and make a minor change and then "Publish my Edits", the page gets a new version with the comments set to "New version x+1".
Also, sometimes the version comment gets set to "New version x" and sometimes to simply "Version x".
Note: approving a previewed page from the dashboard site-map does preserve the version comment.
It seems to me that the page version and version comments for a previewed page should not change until after I publish or approve it.
I also don't think a page should be approved unless I intentionally approve or publish it.
god thats confusing, some minor things i believe do not need to be "approved" as long as only minor things are changed, not sure tho
I agree it is confusing.
If I want to edit a page, and am given the opportunity to preview the edits (as I am in C5), then I should be able edit the preview again until I get it the way I want, then approve or publish. This cycle, in my mind, should only be one version.
The idea of a "minor edit" is a separate feature that might be offered, namely to keep the version the same if the author marks the update as a minor change (I can't see trusting the system to identify a "minor edit"). But I view that as a very optional extra.
If I want to edit a page, and am given the opportunity to preview the edits (as I am in C5), then I should be able edit the preview again until I get it the way I want, then approve or publish. This cycle, in my mind, should only be one version.
The idea of a "minor edit" is a separate feature that might be offered, namely to keep the version the same if the author marks the update as a minor change (I can't see trusting the system to identify a "minor edit"). But I view that as a very optional extra.
NO RESPONSE FROM Concrete5 on this... Maybe Summer vacation???
Also, if you edit a page and then exit edit mode without making any changes, your version comments gets reset to "Version xx"
Also, if you edit a page and then exit edit mode without making any changes, your version comments gets reset to "Version xx"
@waterfeller:
I was able to reproduce all the issues you raised in 5.4.0.5 with one exception. When I edit a page, go to preview, then return to edit mode and exit without making any changes, I do not see the version being silently approved. I see the expected momentary message "This page is pending approval". Please let me know if I'm missing something here...
It seems to me that there are two classes of problems:
1. The structural question you raised with your idea of "minor edits" (i.e. whether or not a new version should be created each time we make some edits and preview them). It seems to me that this may be deeply embedded in the C5 core, so changes may be difficult and time-consuming (and risk introducing new bugs).
2. The management of the default version comments. This seems to me worthy of a bug report which could include the following items:
a) Existing comments should not be overwritten with "Version x" if the user enters edit mode then exits without making any changes.
b) Existing comments should not be overwritten with "Version x" if the momentary pop-up notice is clicked to approve the edits.
c) If it is necessary (as I suspect it is) for a new version to be created each time a user goes from preview mode to edit mode, makes more changes then returns to preview mode, the comment for this new version should default to the last comment the user entered, if any -- or "Version x" otherwise.
d) In any other case, the default version comment should be standardized to "Version x"
What do you think?
I was able to reproduce all the issues you raised in 5.4.0.5 with one exception. When I edit a page, go to preview, then return to edit mode and exit without making any changes, I do not see the version being silently approved. I see the expected momentary message "This page is pending approval". Please let me know if I'm missing something here...
It seems to me that there are two classes of problems:
1. The structural question you raised with your idea of "minor edits" (i.e. whether or not a new version should be created each time we make some edits and preview them). It seems to me that this may be deeply embedded in the C5 core, so changes may be difficult and time-consuming (and risk introducing new bugs).
2. The management of the default version comments. This seems to me worthy of a bug report which could include the following items:
a) Existing comments should not be overwritten with "Version x" if the user enters edit mode then exits without making any changes.
b) Existing comments should not be overwritten with "Version x" if the momentary pop-up notice is clicked to approve the edits.
c) If it is necessary (as I suspect it is) for a new version to be created each time a user goes from preview mode to edit mode, makes more changes then returns to preview mode, the comment for this new version should default to the last comment the user entered, if any -- or "Version x" otherwise.
d) In any other case, the default version comment should be standardized to "Version x"
What do you think?
Hi youngster,
I can't seem to reproduce that either so I am not sure of what I was doing differently.
As far as the rest goes, it looks good.
Will you submit a bug report, or do I?
Regards,
moreaged
I can't seem to reproduce that either so I am not sure of what I was doing differently.
As far as the rest goes, it looks good.
Will you submit a bug report, or do I?
Regards,
moreaged
All these references to "AGED" peeps. HAHAHAHAHA
Mnkras is the baby of the community (that I know of) and I am one of the oldest. I am glad you OLD fellas are working the versioning issues out.
Haven't run into the issues you guys are having but I do know that you should verify and ensure the permissions are set for approval the way you think they should. Check all group members and admins. This may or may not resolve the issue. I know permissions are one of the main culprits of odd behavior. The "Admin" user should be checked as well. Other than that, not sure what is going on.
As a curiosity, how many users are on the site that can edit/approve revisions?
Edit: Though I mentioned permissions above, I have re-read this thread and believe this is not a bug at all but a feature set of the versioning system. It is tied into the versions table from what I can tell and tries to ensure that a version number reflects the actual attempted save. Where I agree that additional comments could/should be made available, the versioning number won't change at all. When I needed to make a comment in the past on a version I have always done something like this:
Version X - This is for something or someone
and I have never had a prob.
Mnkras is the baby of the community (that I know of) and I am one of the oldest. I am glad you OLD fellas are working the versioning issues out.
Haven't run into the issues you guys are having but I do know that you should verify and ensure the permissions are set for approval the way you think they should. Check all group members and admins. This may or may not resolve the issue. I know permissions are one of the main culprits of odd behavior. The "Admin" user should be checked as well. Other than that, not sure what is going on.
As a curiosity, how many users are on the site that can edit/approve revisions?
Edit: Though I mentioned permissions above, I have re-read this thread and believe this is not a bug at all but a feature set of the versioning system. It is tied into the versions table from what I can tell and tries to ensure that a version number reflects the actual attempted save. Where I agree that additional comments could/should be made available, the versioning number won't change at all. When I needed to make a comment in the past on a version I have always done something like this:
Version X - This is for something or someone
and I have never had a prob.
Good suggestion; I checked the "silent approval" logged in as admin but couldn't reproduce that way either. I guess it is an unsolved mystery.
We have 4 people with permission to edit and approve all "content" blocks. We have 3 people who can edit specific blocks on specific pages and approve changes to those pages.
I have also built a page that lets me see the most recent version of each page on the site. It shows the page name, date updated, who edited, who approved, and the version comments. I can also look at the version history of an individual page.
We have 4 people with permission to edit and approve all "content" blocks. We have 3 people who can edit specific blocks on specific pages and approve changes to those pages.
I have also built a page that lets me see the most recent version of each page on the site. It shows the page name, date updated, who edited, who approved, and the version comments. I can also look at the version history of an individual page.
Maybe before any of us submits it as a bug, it would be a good idea to follow bcarone's suggestion and see if it could be related to permissions. My sandbox is pretty simple. Just one user, admin, which still has all the default permissions, but I did turn on advanced permissions the other day... maybe that could be an issue.
Not that it matters, but 'aged man' is just my d.b.a. pseudonym, a reference to the nonsensical character in "Through the Looking Glass." I suppose we're only as aged as we feel...
Not that it matters, but 'aged man' is just my d.b.a. pseudonym, a reference to the nonsensical character in "Through the Looking Glass." I suppose we're only as aged as we feel...
Not that it matters, but 'aged man' is just my d.b.a. pseudonym, a reference to the nonsensical character in "Through the Looking Glass." I suppose we're only as aged as we feel...
Good call agedman...I was pulling your leg when I said that but the fact remains, it is absolutely amazing on how some of the folks here are so young and know so much about certain technologies. Me, I started back in 1980 and have moved into management and I still like tinkering. Though not in Development full time (I wish I were) I still like doing it. Keeps these barnacle bones moving and keeps the mind moving as well.
Good call agedman...I was pulling your leg when I said that but the fact remains, it is absolutely amazing on how some of the folks here are so young and know so much about certain technologies. Me, I started back in 1980 and have moved into management and I still like tinkering. Though not in Development full time (I wish I were) I still like doing it. Keeps these barnacle bones moving and keeps the mind moving as well.
