|
This is about fixing MGNLCMNT-1, MGNLCMNT-47 and MGNLFORUM-92 properly.
The current nodetype definition is unnecessarily complex. For commenting purposes, we added a subnode to messages called properties of type mgnl:messageProperties. If I recall correctly, this was to circumvent the fact that mgnl:message nodes did not allow arbitrary extra properties, but the commenting module needed to add some properties.
I'd suggest this:
- get rid of this subnode and the mgnl:messageProperties type
- confirm that arbitrary properties can now be added to message nodes (I think that's been fixed since)
- if commenting still need extra properties (other than those used by
MGNLCMNT-47), I'd suggest adding a commenting-specific mixin. (and keep on allowing arbitrary properties anyway for flexibility)
This involve migration, of course.
|
|
Given the thousands of other issues we have open that are more highly requested, we won't be able to address this issue in the foreseeable future. Instead we will focus on issues with a higher impact, and more votes.
Thanks for taking the time to raise this issue. As you are no doubt aware this issue has been on our backlog for some time now with very little movement.
I'm going to close this to set expectations so the issue doesn't stay open for years with few updates. If the issue is still relevant please feel free to reopen it or create a new issue.
|