| [12:39:43] | <paul121[m]> | mstenta symbioquine would you like to use a new forum topic or the existing for that "is castrated" discussion? |
| [12:40:07] | <symbioquine[m]> | Makes sense to me |
| [12:40:07] | <paul121[m]> | FWIW I like your idea symbioquine |
| [12:40:24] | <symbioquine[m]> | but I don't feel strongly about not continuing in the previous thread either |
| [12:40:29] | <mstenta[m]> | Doesn't matter to me! Just didn't want it to get lost in GitHub :-) |
| [12:40:41] | <paul121[m]> | you could start a new one with the request specifically... but I don't want to close off other ideas |
| [12:47:11] | <symbioquine[m]> | My main point is that hiding/disabling the field is a backwards incompatible change - even for female animals - since folks are likely already using it (just my opinion/guess) for both sexes of animals to denote neutering in general. |
| [12:47:47] | <symbioquine[m]> | The least disruptive change if that's true would just be to update the labeling in the UI to reflect that it can be used for either sex of animal. |
| [12:48:08] | <mstenta[m]> | Gootcha |
| [12:48:30] | <mstenta[m]> | Good point - if anyone is using it for females |
| [12:49:33] | <symbioquine[m]> | We don't really have a way to know |
| [12:50:36] | <mstenta[m]> | paul121: what was your motivation? requested by a client? |
| [12:51:28] | <symbioquine[m]> | https://farmos.discourse.group/t/generalizing-vs-disabling-hiding-vs-ext... |
| [12:51:52] | <paul121[m]> | No, I assume it was just someone using the tugboat demo. Created the issue in the wrong place |
| [12:51:53] | <mstenta[m]> | Yup I remember that, just curious what prompted the github issue |
| [12:53:01] | <mstenta[m]> | ah gotcha - didn't see that |
| [12:53:03] | <mstenta[m]> | https://github.com/paul121/farm-tugboat-demo/issues/21 |
| [13:37:33] | <mstenta[m]> | Farmer Ed: postmanpat said he just wants the withdrawal fields - doesn't need google calendar integration or flags logic |
| [13:38:05] | <mstenta[m]> | Wonder if that would be an easy first step? Just wrapping the Google bits in an if statement so they only run if the other module is present? |
| [13:38:40] | <mstenta[m]> | That would be enough to allow me to set it up on his instance without worrying about other dependencies/config/etc |
| [13:38:49] | <mstenta[m]> | But if you think even that is a bad idea, that's fine too! :-) |
| [13:39:17] | <mstenta[m]> | It also means we wouldn't need to add the google module to composer.json or *.info.yml |
| [13:41:28] | <FarmerEd[m]> | I'm open to any suggestions, I think ultimately the module should work without the calendar. Would be nice to build the logic into farmOS for handling the flag logic though. |
| [13:42:46] | <mstenta[m]> | maybe 1.0.0-alpha1 with optional google calendar logic and no flag logic? so it really just adds the fields to the material terms and medical logs |
| [13:43:11] | <mstenta[m]> | figure other stuff out later |
| [13:45:57] | <FarmerEd[m]> | The module is based on on paul121: farm-rei module there were some manual steps to add fields to taxonomy terms too, so that medications automatically add the withdrawal period. |
| [13:46:41] | <FarmerEd[m]> | mstenta[m]: That sounds like the simplest solution for now. |
| [13:49:47] | <mstenta[m]> | Sounds like postmanpat mainly wants to use the new field data via node red |
| [13:54:58] | <FarmerEd[m]> | Cool, I think the field in taxonomy terms field would be added too (just hidden in UI) but accessible via the API if he wanted to use it too. But shouldn't matter either if not. |