Found while translating: koha-tmpl/intranet-tmpl/prog/en/modules/admin/identity_providers.tt:204 Allow OPAC access to users from this domain to login with this identity provider. Maybe this was meant? Allow users of this domain to log into the OPAC using this identity provider.
Certainly sounds like a good rephrase to me
There is another, similar one: koha-tmpl/intranet-tmpl/prog/en/modules/admin/identity_providers.tt:212 Allow staff access to users from this domain to login with this identity provider.
Created attachment 169618 [details] [review] Bug 32218: Update string grammer in identity-providers.tt Adiministration>Identity Providers>New identity provider under allow OPAC the language string was updated.
Created attachment 169623 [details] [review] Bug 32218: Update string grammar in identity-providers.tt Adiministration>Identity Providers>New identity provider under allow OPAC the language string was updated. Signed-off-by: Chris Cormack <chris@bigballofwax.co.nz>
Created attachment 169624 [details] [review] Bug 32218: Update string grammar in identity-providers.tt Adiministration>Identity Providers>New identity provider under allow OPAC the language string was updated. Signed-off-by: Chris Cormack <chris@bigballofwax.co.nz>
Created attachment 169765 [details] [review] Bug 32218: Update string grammar in identity-providers.tt Adiministration > Identity Providers > New identity provider under allow OPAC the language string was updated. Signed-off-by: Chris Cormack <chris@bigballofwax.co.nz> Signed-off-by: Owen Leonard <oleonard@myacpl.org>
QA'd by RM. String change.
It looks like I got confused with bug 8855 somehow and falsely attributed this patch to Jennifer Sutton in the commit and pushed it. I sincerely apologize for that confusion. Aleisha or Wainui, do you know who wrote this patch and if they would like to be attributed? I think a revert would not fix in git history, but happy to do it if you think it would be the right thing to do. Also open to other suggestions.
This patch was written by Michael Nixon. I did show him how to 'take credit' for the fix but since he hasn't followed the steps maybe he doesn't mind.
(In reply to Aleisha Amohia from comment #9) > This patch was written by Michael Nixon. I did show him how to 'take credit' > for the fix but since he hasn't followed the steps maybe he doesn't mind. Should we leave as is? I am not sure if a revert/re-push (with the original email) won't make statistics more confusing, but happy to do it if you think we should.
I think it's okay to leave as-is, no need to create extra weirdness/work for yourself. Thank you though!