[MGNLWORKFLOW-132] Deletion workflow message should not be identical to publishing changes Created: 02/Sep/13 Updated: 30/Jan/17 Resolved: 05/Jul/16 |
|
| Status: | Closed |
| Project: | Magnolia Workflow Module |
| Component/s: | Base |
| Affects Version/s: | None |
| Fix Version/s: | 5.1 |
| Type: | Bug | Priority: | Major |
| Reporter: | Antti Hietala | Assignee: | Espen Jervidalo |
| Resolution: | Fixed | Votes: | 0 |
| Labels: | support | ||
| Remaining Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Time Spent: | Not Specified | ||
| Original Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Environment: |
5.0.3-SNAPSHOT |
||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||||||||||||||||
| 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: | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Sprint: | 5.1 - Final | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Description |
|
The title of deletion workflow messages is exactly the same as in other publishing messages: "Publication request for page /x/y/z". The publisher can't tell by looking at the message that is in fact a deletion. It should be obvious from the message. The user who starts the deletion workflow cannot enter comments into the workitem to clarify either. Use a clear message such as "Request to delete page /x/y/z". |
| Comments |
| Comment by Espen Jervidalo [ 04/Oct/13 ] |
|
fixed in related ticket |
| Comment by Mercedes Iruela [ 04/Jul/16 ] |
|
This ticket seems not to be fixed on 5.4.7. Tested on travel-demo the task create for aprovement is similar for publications of pages and for publication of deletions. |
| Comment by Mercedes Iruela [ 05/Jul/16 ] |
|
New ticket created to fix this issue: MGNLWORKFLOW-334 |