Signup: unify instant_confirmation and request_confirm #1139
Conversation
felixrindt
added
the
[C] refactoring
felixrindt
force-pushed
the
unify-simple-signup
branch
from
77d6ff1
to
16e320d
Compare
felixrindt
changed the title
ephios/plugins/basesignup/signup/simple_qualification_required.py
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
ephios/plugins/basesignup/signup/simple_qualification_required.py
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
ephios/plugins/basesignup/signup/simple_qualification_required.py
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
| AutomaticConfirmationMixin, QualificationMinMaxBaseSignupMethod | ||
| ): | ||
| slug = "simple_qualification_required" | ||
| verbose_name = _("Signup where a qualification can be required") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@jeriox what do you think of this name? I think this style of phrasing would allow users to better differentiate between the couple/no sign up methods as well as between the actual signup methods. It also shows that the qualification requirement is optional
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hm, I'd like to see all of the names next to each other to judge that. My first thought was that starting the name with "signup" is a bit redundant since the field is already labeled with signup method.
I still like the idea of using the planners POV since they need to grasp the concept...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We can change the label on the form field though. Or do some custom templating entirely.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we should review the names when section-based and complex is finished.
|
replaced by new flow/structure concept in #1202 |
In an effort to write smaller PRs, here's the refactored simple signup method as discussed in the design blog.