Fix relation picker for activity target

[ijreilly]

This PR introduced a regression, causing noteId or taskId (respectively for noteTarget or taskTarget creation) to be overwritten with an undefined value in the input for noteTarget or taskTarget creation.
This is because in ActivityTargetInlineCellEditMode, in addition to the noteId and taskId we are declaring, we are looking into the object (noteTarget or taskTarget)'s fields and prefilling the record-to-create with a value, potentially undefined, for all of the object fields.
So when looping over noteTarget's fields, we would find the note relation field, and eventually add note: undefined to the record-to-create input, in addition to the non-empty and valid existing noteId.
Then in sanitizeRecordInput, from the note added right above, we add an empty noteId to the input from node, overwriting the "good" noteId.

There are several ways to fix this, I chose to update prefillRecord not to add an empty "note" object that makes no sense in addition to the "noteId" we already have at this stage.
It is also possible to update sanitizeRecordInput not to overwrite a value from a relation (noteId from note relation) if there is already a value in the input.

[greptile-apps]

PR Summary

This PR fixes a regression where noteId/taskId were being overwritten with undefined values during activity target creation in the relation picker component.

• Modified ActivityTargetInlineCellEditMode.tsx to pass the full activity object instead of just ID to prefillRecord() to prevent ID overwriting
• Fixed issue where sanitizeRecordInput was incorrectly adding empty note/task objects that overwrote valid IDs
• Ensures proper handling of activity target creation by preventing duplicate/conflicting field declarations

_{1 file(s) reviewed, 1 comment(s)
Edit PR Review Bot Settings | Greptile}

[greptile-apps]

style: Passing the full activity object here could lead to unnecessary data duplication in the database. Consider passing just the ID if that's all that's needed.

[charlesBochet]

Discussed with Marie offline:

• prefillRecord should not take care of relations
• the caller should