From 47d08e69a4d09e7d89a50c5eb8afcd6893c24379 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Bjarne Fyrstenborg Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 21:56:48 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] Update comment --- .../propertyeditors/mediapicker/mediapicker.controller.js | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/Umbraco.Web.UI.Client/src/views/propertyeditors/mediapicker/mediapicker.controller.js b/src/Umbraco.Web.UI.Client/src/views/propertyeditors/mediapicker/mediapicker.controller.js index 74234d3c36..bf7462942a 100644 --- a/src/Umbraco.Web.UI.Client/src/views/propertyeditors/mediapicker/mediapicker.controller.js +++ b/src/Umbraco.Web.UI.Client/src/views/propertyeditors/mediapicker/mediapicker.controller.js @@ -141,8 +141,8 @@ angular.module('umbraco').controller("Umbraco.PropertyEditors.MediaPickerControl cancel: ".unsortable", update: function(e, ui) { var r = []; - //TODO: Instead of doing this with a half second delay would be better to use a watch like we do in the - // content picker. THen we don't have to worry about setting ids, render models, models, we just set one and let the + // TODO: Instead of doing this with a half second delay would be better to use a watch like we do in the + // content picker. Then we don't have to worry about setting ids, render models, models, we just set one and let the // watch do all the rest. $timeout(function(){ angular.forEach($scope.images, function(value, key) {