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

dev/core#1974: correct UI regression on custom field edit #18304

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 1, 2020

Conversation

highfalutin
Copy link
Contributor

Overview

Corrects the UI issue on the Custom Field edit form mentioned in https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/1974

Before

When editing an existing Multi-Select field, the form showed the type as "Select" in a frozen element and, lower down on the form, offered a "Multi-Select" checkbox which could be unchecked, but doing so had no effect. The user might think they had changed the field from multi-select to select, but the change was not saved.

After

The form shows the type as "Select (Multi-Select)" in a static element. The user can still change the field type by using the "Change Input Field Type" link.

That's in Edit mode. In Create mode, the "Multi-Select" checkbox makes sense, so we keep it appearing (and working) as before.

Notes

"Select (Multi-Select)" is a bit awkward. I'd prefer just "Multi-Select" but this solution keeps the code changes to a minimum.

@civibot
Copy link

civibot bot commented Sep 1, 2020

(Standard links)

@civibot civibot bot added the 5.29 label Sep 1, 2020
@eileenmcnaughton
Copy link
Contributor

Ok - I'm a little fuzzy on this but I'm happy that you have gotten your head fully into it since it's fairly edge / low risk

@eileenmcnaughton eileenmcnaughton merged commit 8a4d70b into civicrm:5.29 Sep 1, 2020
@highfalutin highfalutin deleted the noah/dev-core-1974 branch September 1, 2020 19:46
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants