Trashed featured article not deleted in _content_frontpage db table

[dpardons]

Steps to reproduce the issue

Trash a featured content item

Expected result

Featured content item references must be deleted from the _content_frontpage db table

Actual result

Featured content item references stays in the _content_frontpage db table and pollutes the db table (but without impact on the featured items joomla behaviours)

System information (as much as possible)

Joomla 3.6.3 (and surely previous versions)

Additional comments

[mbabker]

Looks like correct behavior to me. A trashed item still exists in the database so the associated record in the frontpage table is valid to keep. Now if the record persisted after the article was fully deleted then I would call it a bug. Likewise if the trashed article's state wasn't accounted for in frontend views displaying featured items.

[dpardons]

Hi

1. In my opinion, if you trash an article, it must not stay in the featured item db because if you reenable this article, there is no reason that it comes back automatically as featured.

2. Deleting definitely the article does not delete the record in _content_frontpage db table.
   Regards

Daniel

---

_{This comment was created with the J!Tracker Application at issues.joomla.org/tracker/joomla-cms/12475.}

[brianteeman]

1. thats always going to be one of those he says she says where there is
   value to both options

2. yes it probably should but on the other hand there is no negative
   consequences of it not being deleted either. If you want to contribute some
   code to achieve that I am sure it will be considered

On 19 October 2016 at 15:05, dpardons notifications@github.com wrote:

Hi

1. In my opinion, if you trash an article, it must not stay in the
   featured item db because if you reenable this article, there is no reason
   that it comes back automatically as featured.

2. Deleting definitely the article does not delete the record in
   _content_frontpage db table.
   Regards

Daniel

This comment was created with the J!Tracker Application
https://github.com/joomla/jissues at issues.joomla.org/tracker/
joomla-cms/12475.

—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#12475 (comment),
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABPH8a-agrErI_jK1C4BQTu5ajik1UCGks5q1iOQgaJpZM4Ka-j4
.

Brian Teeman
Co-founder Joomla! and OpenSourceMatters Inc.
https://brian.teeman.net/ http://brian.teeman.net/

[dpardons]

1. Agreed but not logical. If you trash something, you trash it not just unpublish it. Therefore if you reenable it, it must come back unpublished and surely not featured.

2. I discovered the problem on a one year old site. There was 10 true featured articles but the table _content_frontpage contains more than 100 records. Imagine in a few years!
   Currently, I did not discovered a side effect but what about future versions of joomla?
   For me, this is a true bug but alas, I am not an experienced coder and therefore I can not propose a contribution to correct the code.

Hope you will transfer the bug to an experienced coder.

Regards
Daniel

---

_{This comment was created with the J!Tracker Application at issues.joomla.org/tracker/joomla-cms/12475.}

[Bakual]

If you trash something, you trash it not just unpublish it. Therefore if you reenable it, it must come back unpublished and surely not featured.

"featured" is just a property of the item. If you trash something, you don't change any property, you just change it's state.
When you "untrash" the item (eg because you trashed it accidently), you expect it to come up exactly the way it was before.

For me, this is a true bug

That's right and I can confirm it. Deleting (not trashing!) the item should remove it from the featured table but it doesn't.

[brianteeman]

Its the same (problem) with items not being removed from the UCM tables if I remember correctly

[alikon]

Deleting (not trashing!) the item should remove it from the featured table but it doesn't.

can someone test #12505

@brianteeman are you referring to this one #8770 for the UCM issue ?

[brianteeman]

Yes

[brianteeman]

Closing as it was addressed n #12505