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

Markers - Improve Timestamps check for GPS/UAV Terminals #10485

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

OverlordZorn
Copy link
Contributor

@OverlordZorn OverlordZorn commented Nov 7, 2024

Updates the checks in the fnc_canTimestamp.sqf to also check for GPS and UAV's.

@BOT-Garry and @DartRuffian rubbed their braincells together for this one.

@OverlordZorn OverlordZorn changed the title markers - also check for GPS/UAV Terminals Markers - Timestamps: also check for GPS/UAV Terminals Nov 7, 2024
@OverlordZorn OverlordZorn reopened this Nov 7, 2024
@BOT-Garry
Copy link

Tooltip for timestamp unavailability should also reflect GPS functionality.

@OverlordZorn OverlordZorn changed the title Markers - Timestamps: also check for GPS/UAV Terminals Markers - Improve Timestamps check for GPS/UAV Terminals Nov 7, 2024
@PabstMirror PabstMirror added this to the 3.18.2 milestone Nov 8, 2024
@PabstMirror PabstMirror added the kind/enhancement Release Notes: **IMPROVED:** label Nov 8, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Do we want to invalidate the existing translations?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Not worth it IMO.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The issue I have with not invalidating the translations is that people won't be aware that they need to be updated.
If we can mark these as 'needs updating' somehow, I'd be fine with that solution.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
kind/enhancement Release Notes: **IMPROVED:**
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants