Add backward compatibility for DefaultTabServer, DefaultTabDatabase, DefaultTabTable, NavigationTreeDefaultTabTable and NavigationTreeDefaultTabTable2

[csware]

Description

if a user has a legacy setting for DefaultTabServer, DefaultTabDatabase, DefaultTabTable, NavigationTreeDefaultTabTable and NavigationTreeDefaultTabTable2 don't provide a broken fallback, but mimic the old behavior.

Fixes #16698
Fixes #16713

This affects 5.1.0 and maybe other versions.

Before submitting pull request, please review the following checklist:

• Make sure you have read our CONTRIBUTING.md document.
• Make sure you are making a pull request against the correct branch. For example, for bug fixes in a released version use the corresponding QA branch and for new features use the master branch. If you have a doubt, you can ask as a comment in the bug report or on the mailing list.
• Every commit has proper Signed-off-by line as described in our DCO. This ensures that the work you're submitting is your own creation.
• Every commit has a descriptive commit message.
• Every commit is needed on its own, if you have just minor fixes to previous commits, you can squash them.
• Any new functionality is covered by tests.

[csware]

I'm not sure if this PR fixes all cases, such as LeftDefaultTabTable

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #16714 (2f4060e) into QA_5_1 (3a01452) will decrease coverage by 0.01%.
The diff coverage is 83.33%.

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##             QA_5_1   #16714      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     53.11%   53.10%   -0.02%     
- Complexity    15202    15216      +14     
============================================
  Files           471      471              
  Lines         63207    63224      +17     
============================================
+ Hits          33573    33575       +2     
- Misses        29634    29649      +15     

Flag	Coverage Δ	Complexity Δ
dbase-extension	?	?
recode-extension	52.73% <83.33%> (+0.03%)	0.00 <0.00> (ø)
unit-7.1-ubuntu-latest	52.75% <83.33%> (+0.03%)	0.00 <0.00> (ø)
unit-7.2-ubuntu-latest	52.93% <83.33%> (+0.03%)	0.00 <0.00> (ø)
unit-7.3-ubuntu-latest	57.75% <83.33%> (+0.03%)	0.00 <0.00> (ø)
unit-7.4-ubuntu-latest	57.75% <83.33%> (+0.03%)	0.00 <0.00> (ø)
unit-8.0-ubuntu-latest	57.90% <83.33%> (+0.03%)	0.00 <0.00> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ	Complexity Δ
libraries/classes/Menu.php	83.33% <0.00%> (-0.73%)	67.00 <0.00> (ø)
libraries/classes/Util.php	68.03% <100.00%> (+1.41%)	421.00 <0.00> (+14.00)
libraries/classes/Plugins/Import/ImportShp.php	56.95% <0.00%> (-15.90%)	42.00% <0.00%> (ø%)
libraries/classes/Import.php	63.27% <0.00%> (-0.27%)	246.00% <0.00%> (ø%)

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 3a01452...3ad189b. Read the comment docs.

[williamdes]

This affects 5.1.0 and maybe other versions.

Only 5.1.0 for now, and 5.2.0-dev

I will rebase+squash your fix if @MauricioFauth also thinks this is a good fix
I kind of agree with the fix, because it makes sense but is more like a legacy support

[MauricioFauth]

It's better to add a default case to the switch instead of supporting these old values.

[csware]

It's better to add a default case to the switch instead of supporting these old values.

What do you mean with a default value? Wouldn't that mean that the old values won't work any more?

[ibennetch]

We have always considered backwards compatibility important for our configuration settings, I'm glad you caught this.

LGTM

[williamdes]

We have always considered backwards compatibility important for our configuration settings, I'm glad you caught this.

I agree it is important. Will add more tests before merging this

[williamdes]

LeftDefaultTabTable

I could not find anything named like that in the code and in the docs.

[williamdes]

Good work, It works fine !
I added tests, this PR fixes 3 bugs in total

[csware]

Any plans when a new version is released?

[ibennetch]

The next release is slightly behind schedule already because of wanting to incorporate a fix for one remaining issue. William has prepared some solution for that, so if all goes well with it I expect a release in the coming days. Thanks for asking.

[williamdes]

The next release is slightly behind schedule already because of wanting to incorporate a fix for one remaining issue. William has prepared some solution for that, so if all goes well with it I expect a release in the coming days. Thanks for asking.

Yes, it is #16734 (comment)
Any feedback and testing is very welcome