[symfony-devs] Re: Admin generator feature request

2009-11-10 Thread ashton
I haven't heard anything else about this after the upvotes, but If anyone can enlighten me as to what if anything is going on with this? If not, if there is another place to request that the admin generator action be ajax friendly. thanks ashton On Nov 5, 1:45 pm, ashton wrote: > I added anothe

[symfony-devs] Re: Admin generator feature request

2009-11-08 Thread ashton
I added another check in the processFormAction file that catches the invalid form case processFormAction.php 33a34,38 > elseif ($request->isXmlHttpRequest()) > { > $notice = array('error' => 'The item has not been saved due to some > errors.'); > return $this->renderText(

[symfony-devs] Re: Admin generator feature request

2009-11-03 Thread ashton
That works great for me, except in the case of the $form->isValid check failing. That bypasses the patched code and just uses the regular edit template. On Oct 27, 12:11 pm, david wrote: > Attached is a quick patch for Doctrine that will generate Ajax aware   > actions on processForm - and is f

[symfony-devs] Re: Admin generator feature request

2009-10-27 Thread david
Attached is a quick patch for Doctrine that will generate Ajax aware actions on processForm - and is for Symfony 1.3-beta1. The file that should be patched is lib/vendor/symfony/lib/plugins/sfDoctrinePlugin/data/generator/sfDoctrineModule/admin/parts/processFormAction.php (only the filename

[symfony-devs] Re: Admin generator feature request

2009-10-27 Thread Łukasz Wojciechowski
+1 I also frequently encounter this "issue" -- Best regards Lukasz Wojciechowski New Generation Software +48 602 214 629 http://www.ngsoft.pl 2009/10/27 Richtermeister : > > +up, > > I regularly overwrite this method just to change the flash messages > from "item" to the proper object name or

[symfony-devs] Re: Admin generator feature request

2009-10-27 Thread Richtermeister
+up, I regularly overwrite this method just to change the flash messages from "item" to the proper object name or redirect to a different page altogether. Seems a good idea to break this functionality apart. Daniel On Oct 27, 9:12 am, ashton wrote: > Hi, apologies if this goes somewhere else.