brettp wrote on 42026290-01-11

The only reason not to is the pending events / hooks rewrite for 1.9.

I do see the use for this, though I definitely prefer a hook to a config setting.

cash wrote on 42050747-01-30

We need to develop guidance on when to use config settings and when to use hooks. Hooks offer more flexibility but have a higher overhead (more code to load and compile).

Title changed from forwar_url after login to forward_url after login by cash on 42050747-01-30

trac user ismayil.khayredinov wrote on 42053357-04-25

After reading some of the questions related to this in the community, I must agree with Brett on using a hook. People want to do all kinds of things: forward on first login only, forward when xyz criteria is met etc.

cash wrote on 42053466-03-25

Do we implement this for 1.8.x or for 1.9?

brettp wrote on 42053798-10-20

1.9 is the target for the hooks rewrite. We made an exception for one hook because without it we couldn't properly support RSS. This hook would be a new feature, so I think it can wait. Please comment if anyone thinks we need more discussion.

Milestone changed to Elgg 1.9.0 by brettp on 42053798-10-20

trac user ismayil.khayredinov wrote on 42072115-12-21

After looking at the code again, it looks like we don't really need a hook. We could just add another hidden input to the login form and use it in action as a forward url.

cash wrote on 42072171-08-25

Plugin hooks tend to be about changing how Elgg acts while views are about how Elgg looks. Because of that, I prefer the plugin hook over the view approach. What's the advantage of using the view?

trac user ismayil.khayredinov wrote on 42075259-11-15

Ah, sorry I wasn't clear. I was thinking about a solution that could be introduced in 1.8 still.

trac user Cash Costello wrote on 42467208-05-27

Fixes #4275 adds a login:forward, user hook - thanks to Ismayil
Changeset: daa9ce7

trac user hellekin wrote on 42932311-08-14

Could that fix be integrated in 1.8.10?