[MGNLUI-3602] info.magnolia.dam.app.ui.field.definition.DamUploadFieldDefinition is not i18n aware Created: 23/Sep/15 Updated: 29/Sep/22 Resolved: 25/Jan/17 |
|
| Status: | Closed |
| Project: | Magnolia UI |
| Component/s: | None |
| Affects Version/s: | 5.4.10, 5.5 |
| Fix Version/s: | 5.4.11, 5.5.2 |
| Type: | Bug | Priority: | Neutral |
| Reporter: | Jan Schulte | Assignee: | Oanh Thai Hoang |
| Resolution: | Fixed | Votes: | 4 |
| Labels: | None | ||
| Remaining Estimate: | 0d | ||
| Time Spent: | 3d 1.5h | ||
| Original Estimate: | 3d | ||
| Issue Links: |
|
||||||||||||||||
| Template: |
|
||||||||||||||||
| Acceptance criteria: |
Empty
|
||||||||||||||||
| Task DoD: |
[ ]*
Doc/release notes changes? Comment present?
[ ]*
Downstream builds green?
[ ]*
Solution information and context easily available?
[ ]*
Tests
[ ]*
FixVersion filled and not yet released
[ ] 
Architecture Decision Record (ADR)
|
||||||||||||||||
| Bug DoR: |
[ ]*
Steps to reproduce, expected, and actual results filled
[ ]*
Affected version filled
|
||||||||||||||||
| Date of First Response: | |||||||||||||||||
| Epic Link: | I18n fields issues | ||||||||||||||||
| Sprint: | Saigon 79, Saigon 80 | ||||||||||||||||
| Story Points: | 5 | ||||||||||||||||
| Description |
|
The info.magnolia.dam.app.ui.field.definition.DamUploadFieldDefinition is not i18n enabled |
| Comments |
| Comment by Oanh Thai Hoang [ 17/Jan/17 ] |
|
Hi viet.nguyen. Since I can't make i18n work on DamUploadFieldDefinition even in version 5.3.4. I looked deeply into source code and it's history, I found that we don't support i18n for this field before. Could you please ask our client for more detail how can he make it work in (Magnolia 5.3.x). It would help me a lot. Thank you |
| Comment by Tom Wespi [ 13/Feb/17 ] |
|
I tested with 5.4.11 and it seems that it still doesn't work. I tested with 2 languages (de/en), created an i18n file upload field, uploaded 2 files (test_de.pdf, test_en.pdf) and created a link to them with cmsfn.link(content.file). It creates following, wrong link: The files are saved correctly under the node |
| Comment by Mikaël Geljić [ 13/Feb/17 ] |
|
Hi tomwespi, first thanks for mentioning the storage did work as it should! Thanks again for reporting, |