Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Allow to Set Different Certificate Print Format for each LMS Course #574

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

Rola-anvil
Copy link

This is to allow the system to create different certificates for each course

@ahmadRagheb
Copy link
Contributor

nice job rola

@pateljannat
Copy link
Collaborator

@Rola-anvil I don't understand the need for a link field in the LMS Course doctype.

When creating a certificate, it considers the default print format set.

You can just make your desired format as default.

@Rola-anvil
Copy link
Author

Rola-anvil commented Aug 2, 2023

@pateljannat Thanks for replying.
every course needs a different certificate design, so I have created this field to let the system user choose a custom certificate design or consider the default one

@cypress
Copy link

cypress bot commented Aug 3, 2023

Passing run #156 ↗︎

0 1 0 0 Flakiness 0

Details:

Merge 31013e1 into d0ac0e4...
Project: lms Commit: 20e3c77cbe ℹ️
Status: Passed Duration: 00:46 💡
Started: Aug 3, 2023 9:09 AM Ended: Aug 3, 2023 9:10 AM

This comment has been generated by cypress-bot as a result of this project's GitHub integration settings.

"description": null,
"docstatus": 0,
"doctype": "Custom Field",
"dt": "LMS Course",
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@Rola-anvil why add a custom field in LMS Course doctype when you can add a standard field.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Also, you have made the changes in the main branch of your fork. Can you create another branch for this feature instead?

@pateljannat pateljannat closed this May 2, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants