[LIVECOPY-159] Fields under composite/switchable/multi fields are not protectable independently on parent field Created: 09/Sep/19 Updated: 16/Aug/22 Resolved: 19/Jul/22 |
|
| Status: | Closed |
| Project: | Live Copy |
| Component/s: | None |
| Affects Version/s: | 3.2.7 |
| Fix Version/s: | None |
| Type: | Improvement | Priority: | Neutral |
| Reporter: | Evzen Fochr | Assignee: | Laura Delnevo |
| Resolution: | Won't Do | Votes: | 2 |
| Labels: | blocked | ||
| Remaining Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Time Spent: | 1h 11m | ||
| Original Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Issue Links: |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Template: |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Acceptance criteria: |
Empty
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Task DoD: |
[ ]*
Doc/release notes changes? Comment present?
[ ]*
Downstream builds green?
[ ]*
Solution information and context easily available?
[ ]*
Tests
[ ]*
FixVersion filled and not yet released
[ ] 
Architecture Decision Record (ADR)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Date of First Response: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Epic Link: | AuthorX Support | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Description |
|
Add protect/un-protect icon to fields that are under composite/switchable/multi field |
| Comments |
| Comment by Marvin Kerkhoff [ 03/Mar/22 ] |
|
Hi guys, we have saw this issue in our enviornment. The current state is critical for us. All switchable link fields are not protected anymore. How could we solve this? Is there a workaround? |
| Comment by Patrik Jeller [ 17/Mar/22 ] |
|
Some additional information: With LiveCopy 3.2.3 nested fields were protectable but were not actually protected which leads to content being overwritten (this was at least the case for compositeFields and the PrefixNameDecorator), which is a major issue for us. With the update to LiveCopy 3.2.7 the situation changed. Now it appears that in addition to the problem above, all nested fields (switchable, composite, etc) are missing the button to protect a field completely. if (dialogDefinition instanceof ConfiguredFormDialogDefinition) { return ((ConfiguredFormDialogDefinition)dialogDefinition).getForm().getProperties().stream().noneMatch((property) -> { return fieldDefinition.getName().equals(property.getName()) && this.checkIsAssignableFrom(fieldDefinition, property); }); } else { The code seems not to consider nested properties of the dialogDefinition instance and will therefore suppress the protect button for the nested field. |
| Comment by Pooja Bhavsar [ 24/May/22 ] |
|
Hello Laura, Is there an estimated timeframe for a solution for this ticket? Currently, we have attempted all the suggestion by Magnolia however until the bugfixes are available, users will not be able to appropriately use the protect/unprotect feature. |
| Comment by Adrian Brooks [ 13/Jun/22 ] |
|
After talking to Laura last week, a note has been added to the top of this section (for the time being): https://docs.magnolia-cms.com/product-docs/6.2/Special-Features/Live-Copy/Live-Copy-usage.html#_fields_in_a_component |
| Comment by Pooja Bhavsar [ 13/Jun/22 ] |
|
Hi Adrian, The note is useful however, how can we assist users working in Magnolia with this issue? For example, our website has many country trees which are being pushed from master in multiple languages. The protect/unprotect function is used to protect certain fields that should not be overridden. |
| Comment by Laura Delnevo [ 17/Jun/22 ] |
|
Hi pbhavsar, I am Laura, PM for Author Experience. Thanks for your comments. We are looking at your further feedback, and I will be posting an update as soon as we can. |
| Comment by Pooja Bhavsar [ 01/Jul/22 ] |
|
Hi ldelnevo,
Is there any update on this ticket? We have completed all actions suggested but are still seeing this issue. Thanks. |
| Comment by Pooja Bhavsar [ 18/Jul/22 ] |
|
Hi ldelnevo, I noticed that this ticket would not be fixed and is closed. Can you please provide a workaround and reason as to why this is closed without a resolution? |
| Comment by Laura Delnevo [ 19/Jul/22 ] |
|
Hi pbhavsar Sure thx for asking. The blocker we're facing is a vaadin8 dependency that does not support the desired functionality in multi/complex fields. Atm, I'm afraid that there's no existing workaround that we're aware of that could be considered. |