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

fix: insertion markers destroying procedure models for block-shareable-procedures in v11 #2174

Merged

Conversation

BeksOmega
Copy link
Contributor

The basics

The details

Resolves

Fixes N/A

Proposed Changes

Found that with the new v11 beta the insertion marker managers for procedure definitions were destroying the procedure models when they are destroyed. This is because insertion markers now do the non-full erialization (since they should just reference the model of whatever block they're shadowing).

Reason for Changes

Fix buggies. This was causing mirroring events into other workspaces to break.

Test Coverage

Manually tested. Confirmed that tests pass.

Documentation

I'll update the description of google/blockly#7730 to reflect this break as well.

Additional Information

N/A

@BeksOmega BeksOmega requested a review from a team as a code owner January 27, 2024 00:17
@BeksOmega BeksOmega requested review from cpcallen and removed request for a team January 27, 2024 00:17
Copy link
Contributor

@cpcallen cpcallen left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Please update the PR description (maybe title?) to explicitly mention that it is the block-shareable-procedures plugin that is being fixed.

@BeksOmega BeksOmega changed the title fix: insertion markers destroying procedure models v11 fix: insertion markers destroying procedure models for block-shareable-procedures in v11 Jan 29, 2024
@BeksOmega BeksOmega merged commit f14666f into google:rc/v11.0.0 Jan 29, 2024
10 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants