- 🇺🇸United States smustgrave
This issue is being reviewed by the kind folks in Slack, #needs-review-queue-initiative. We are working to keep the size of Needs Review queue [2700+ issues] to around 400 (1 month or less), following Review a patch or merge request → as a guide.
This seems more like a bug potentially
Either way will need a test case
Did not test.
- Merge request !9897Issue #3098960 by schaefdi, pbonnefoi: Nested paragraphs with same field name are ordered wrong → (Open) created by pbonnefoi
- 🇺🇸United States smustgrave
Previously tagged for tests which still appear to be needed. thanks
- First commit to issue fork.
- 🇮🇳India arunkumark Coimbatore
As per the comment, I added a test case to check the unique class for the multi-field value. Moving to NR now.
I did some manually testing. On latest 11.x, after following the reproduction steps in #4 🐛 Nested paragraphs with same field name are ordered wrong Needs work to create the paragraphs and fields, I created Article content with 3 Parent Paragraphs (Parent 1, Parent 2, and Parent 3), and each Parent Paragraph with 2 children (Parent 1 => Child 1, Child 2; Parent 2 => Child 3, Child4; Parent 3 => Child 5, Child 6). I then dragged Parent 3 to go above Parent 2 (See screenshot → ). After saving, Parent 2 incorrectly remained above Parent 3 ( See screenshot → ).
I then applied the changes from MR 9897. Re-edited the page and dragged Parent 3 above Parent 2 again ( see screenshot → ). After save, Parent 3 stays correctly above Parent 2 ( See screenshot → ).
I tried to reproduce the issue mentioned in #8 🐛 Nested paragraphs with same field name are ordered wrong Needs work with block content and nested paragraphs in Layout Builder, but I did not see the console errors.
The automated test that's needed is a functional test that does similar to steps to the manual test just described. But I'm not sure an automated test can be written using core alone, at least not easily. Given that and the fact that the fix is essentially a one-line diff, I wonder if it qualifies under 🌱 [policy, no patch] Better scoping for bug fix test coverage RTBC as something that can be committed without this test. Moving to RTBC for confirmation.
- 🇫🇷France pbonnefoi
Thanks for your help ! Indeed, it seems rather difficult to write a functional test since this bug is a combination of core and paragraphs.