View Issue Details
|ID||Project||Category||View Status||Date Submitted||Last Update|
|0022098||mantisbt||customization||public||2017-01-01 12:53||2017-02-19 18:08|
|Target Version||2.2.0||Fixed in Version|
|Summary||0022098: Setting bottom_include_page does not include specified file|
Option bottom_include_page to include a file at the bottom of each page is still available but does not work any longer.
|Tags||No tags attached.|
We had a discussion on this. We may end up deprecating such configuration option depending on the final solution that results from the discussion. Assigning to @syncguru since he will coordinate this discussion and the necessary work out of it.
The request has been triggered by a user in forum.
Keep also in mind that we use it on https://www.mantisbt.org/bugs
I am using $g_bottom_include_page to get our Name and Logo on the logon page
It is possible to get the logo in $g_window_title = 'TESTUMGEBUNG - <img src="/mantis_TEST/images/EBVLOGO_60.gif" height="35" " />';
That's all what we need - thank you for this great system! :)
but this is not beautifull ;)
@mahindra the ability add html in the window title as in 0022098:0055352 is a bug that we should fix. It also won't work because window title is also used in other scenarios like some of the email notifications.
Like SteveA, we use $g_top_include_page and $g_bottom_include_page to wrap a MantisBT installation into our website with a consistent banner, menu, and game server statuses across all pages and subdomains for navigation. We manage open source development of the Cyan Worlds' Myst Online (Uru) MMO. Without the custom header and footer, I cannot upgrade from 1.3 to 2.x+ and maintain visual integration. I don't understand how there can be any question about web products like this playing friendly with website integration.
This is our implementation of 1.3:
We used $g_top_include_page = '%absolute_path%/header.inc.php'; as project meta-navigation. Now what out of the box solution do we have for this purpose?
I see this task is assigned, but will restoring $g_top_include_page and $g_bottom_include_page definitely be on the roadmap? An existing feature for many years has been removed, so I'm naturally curious about why.
I guess a question after looking at your pull request from syncguru:
What happens if I apply it? Or in other words - why not?
|2017-01-01 12:53||atrol||New Issue|
|2017-01-02 23:03||vboctor||Assigned To||=> syncguru|
|2017-01-02 23:03||vboctor||Status||new => assigned|
|2017-01-02 23:05||vboctor||Note Added: 0054897|
|2017-01-03 02:54||atrol||Note Added: 0054899|
|2017-01-03 07:44||dregad||File Added: screenshot-my_view.png|
|2017-01-03 07:44||dregad||File Deleted: screenshot-my_view.png|
|2017-01-05 11:11||atrol||Relationship added||has duplicate 0022117|
|2017-01-05 13:35||SteveA||Note Added: 0054947|
|2017-01-25 14:32||mahindra||Note Added: 0055326|
|2017-01-26 17:52||mahindra||Note Added: 0055352|
|2017-01-26 18:22||mahindra||Note Added: 0055353|
|2017-01-26 21:50||vboctor||Note Added: 0055359|
|2017-02-01 22:49||vboctor||Target Version||2.0.1 => 2.2.0|
|2017-02-10 00:52||JWPlatt||Note Added: 0055629|
|2017-02-17 03:41||vendeeglobe||Note Added: 0055715|
|2017-02-19 17:46||JWPlatt||Note Added: 0055722|
|2017-02-19 18:08||JWPlatt||Note Added: 0055723|