Website api - fix nonstandard BAO delete method #11625
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
@eileenmcnaughton IMO this signature change is safe because of the obscurity of the function. Your thoughts? |
|
@colemanw I think your analysis is correct. I searched through the code & could not find other places calling it. I think it is reasonable to assume that no extensions would call this given there is an api function & has been for many years. Nice to see another CRM_Core_DAO::$_nullArray gone... |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Overview
Fix oddball BAO del function.
Before
Function did not conform to standards and hooks were not called when deleting a website.
After
Hooks are called when deleting a website. The BAO function follows conventions so the api can use it.
Technical Details
This function was only called from one place. Even the api3 was not using it. So changing the function signature seems safe.