feat: include a provider option to allow custom app names #10335
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
Introduce the
Provider
option to handle some differences between web office products. This will be used instead of theName
. Note that theName
will still be used in other places such as service names, and it will be shown in the web interface.The intention is to provide a bit of extra branding: you could have a specific Collabora installation fully customized and branded to your liking, so you could use
BBox
asName
and keepCollabora
asProvider
.Note: There are some issues with the naming used as
Name
, so it's highly recommended to use only alphanumeric chars. Spaces are known to cause issues.Related Issue
#10306
Motivation and Context
We need to distinguish between the name and the provider.
How Has This Been Tested?
Screenshots (if appropriate):
Types of changes
Checklist:
Notes
Need to consider a migration, otherwise it could be a breaking change.
For installations with Collabora, this change shouldn't cause any issue because the default provider will also be Collabora. However, for other installations, the provider will also be Collabora despite connecting to an OnlyOffice installation (for example). This might cause some features to break.
We also need changes in reva for the new templates. It's currently using the app name (which might be different) instead of the provider name. Right now, the collaboration service can't sent the provider name to reva.