Home Forums Development Customizing activity plan step edit dialog with a picker

Viewing 4 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #18028
      JohnJohn
      Participant

      We’ve added a user person picker to ActivityPlanTemplateStepDetail.dialog and seeing strange behavior. This is a nested dialog so this may be related to the issue.

      1. If we pick a person press ok, then save the base dialog it works as expected
      2. If we re-open the APT edit then the step edit dialog after step 1, the picked person is correct
      3. If we open the step edit dialog then pick another person, press ok, (don’t save the base dialog) then reopen the step edit dialog the picker only has the single value from step 1.

      In other words, it seems like the picker is ignoring the dirty state. Is this a known issue or are we doing something wrong?

      This doesn’t happen when creating an APT, it only affects edit. Also noticed that the doc mgr table saves immediately when closing the nested dialog. That is inconsistent with other fields but probably an acceptable workaround. Is there a way to turn this on for a picker?

      0
    • #18072
      Nicholas Mc NeillyNicholas Mc Neilly
      Participant

      We haven’t seen this issue with user pickers in that particular dialog (Assign To…specific user; For…related entity).
      Please let us know what customization was made. The collection must be non-lazy but it should already be non-lazy unless forced.

      0
    • #18082
      JohnJohn
      Participant

      I realized it’s a MultiPicker rather than a Picker (we need to select multiple in this case) – that may be the difference. I also turned off lazy in the Multipicker but that didn’t help – is that the place it should be turned off?

      Here’s what was customized:

      I added this layout referenced from ActivityPlanTemplateStepDetail.dialog

      Here’s the line from UserPerson.picker:

      Here’s the ActivityPlanStep.meta attribute

      Here’s the new class bgm:ActivityPlanStepSignatory. I expect it to be reproducible without persistence but I haven’t tried but let me know if you want datasource/upgrade too.

       

      0
    • #18097
      Nicholas Mc NeillyNicholas Mc Neilly
      Participant

      We are currently looking into this item a bit more and will provide an update by tomorrow.

      0
    • #18116
      Nicholas Mc NeillyNicholas Mc Neilly
      Participant

      Upon further review. We believe the issue reported is a new defect. A ticket has been created in our system to track this issue. It is currently targeted to our December 2021 release.

      0
Viewing 4 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.