Mensagem enviada por Tim Hunt

Imagem de Core developers Imagem de Documentation writers Imagem de Particularly helpful Moodlers Imagem de Peer reviewers Imagem de Plugin developers

Sorry, I can't immediately see what is going on.

I suggest that to try to work out what is happening, you start with the simplest possible question, then add a bit at a time until it breaks.

  1. Create a new question with just one drop zone and two drag items, all plain text.
  2. Try it, and verify that that much works.
  3. Change just one of the drag items to add multilang with just 2 languages.
  4. Test ...
  5. ...

Is multilang avialable on https://qa.moodledemo.net/? Yes, 'Multi-language content' is enabled there. So, test there as well as your own site, just to check what you are seeing is consistent.

Média das avaliações: Useful (2)
Imagem de Core developers Imagem de Documentation writers Imagem de Particularly helpful Moodlers Imagem de Peer reviewers Imagem de Plugin developers
The person who deserves most of the thanks is Mark Johnson from Catalyst EU. He acutally did most of the work (along with a few others), I just reviewed it to get it integrated. And I suppose Antonia, Luca, Thomas and myself got this work prioritised as part of our Question Bank project.

The even better news is that we also managed to get MDL-73602 done ready for the Moodle 5.2 release, so the old legacy code that is no longer really needed, but which causes these problems, is finally gone for good sorriso
Média das avaliações: Useful (1)
Imagem de Core developers Imagem de Documentation writers Imagem de Particularly helpful Moodlers Imagem de Peer reviewers Imagem de Plugin developers
Since Moodle ... about version 4.0, so version 4.5.8 is fine ... the answer is that you can choose. If you want the scores to be re-calculated, then do a regrade. If you want the old attempts to say exactly as they are, so you have a record of what happened at the time, then don't regrade. Either is fine, and there is no database inconsistency in either case.
Média das avaliações: Useful (1)
Imagem de Core developers Imagem de Documentation writers Imagem de Particularly helpful Moodlers Imagem de Peer reviewers Imagem de Plugin developers

That misses the point. Some of the work that is sitting there not yet reviewed is work that was not integrated into 5.1, and got held over to the 5.2 cycle (if not worse).

Does Moodle HQ value community contributions or not? At the last MoodleMoot Global, all the senior mangers stood on stage and talked about how much they valued community contributions. But, persistently, HQ under-resources the integration team. There was a great effort made in September and October last year, which finally got the queue to under 100, but then it was just allowed to grow to over 150 again. (Data from Integration exposted.)

You need an integration team that, on average, itegrates more issues each week than on average are submitted to integration. HQ have been monitoring the key metrics on that for years (as linked above) the metrics show that the team is not big enough, and the mount of resourcing is not changed. Why?

Média das avaliações: Useful (4)