Skip to content

Conversation

webdevinition
Copy link

Hello @jbtronics,

In relation to #1051 the feature for custom part states.
Also mentioned in the discussion under #1041, section 3.

I am grateful for integration!

Best regards,
Marcel

@jbtronics
Copy link
Member

My preliminary remarks from a quick look at the PR:

  • What is the advantage of having the custom states as its own entity over just putting that into a tag? (Or just an additional text field in the part)?
  • The two migrations should probably be merged. I dont see much reason to have it split in two.
  • You should add tests, to ensure the admin pages are available and everything behaves like intended
  • Something has broken the existing tests.

@webdevinition
Copy link
Author

@jbtronics, please excuse me for not getting back to you on this matter yet.
It has not been forgotten, and feedback will follow in any case.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants