-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.5k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add link protocol field customization #3421
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Unit tests
- Chrome (CI) 🚨 - see CI
- Firefox (CI) 🚨 - see CI
- Safari ✅
- IE8 ✅
- IE11 ✅
- Edge ✅
http://localhost:1030/#tests/is:unit,path:/tests/plugins/link,path:/tests/plugins/autolink,path:/tests/plugins/tableselection/integrations/link
Manual tests
- There is an issue with
<other>
protocol - after selecting it, and reopening dialog default one is used:
- Setting non-existent value or
<other>
results in emptyProtocol
value:
I'm for adding list of available values to link_defaultProtocol
property docs, mentioning also that it can't handle custom values. I was thinking that this list should also include <other>
, however it seems it is a replacement for empty/no-protocol and it has no value so might problematic to set:
Let's skip it.
Code
See code comments.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good 👍 And I see handling <other>
was easier than I thought 👏
Unit tests
Chrome (CI) ✅
Firefox (CI) ✅
Safari ✅
IE8 ✅
IE11 ✅
Edge ✅
Manual tests
👍
What is the purpose of this pull request?
New feature
Does your PR contain necessary tests?
All patches which change the editor code must include tests. You can always read more
on PR testing,
how to set the testing environment and
how to create tests
in the official CKEditor documentation.
This PR contains
What is the proposed changelog entry for this pull request?
What changes did you make?
Closes #2227