AJAX pager doesn't work with exposed filter which has a default value

Attaching patch for the latest version. I haven't succeeded with tests so far, will get back to them later.

I have fixed the CC failure, attached interdiff for same. please review

The last submitted patch, 20: 3100826-20.patch, failed testing. View results →

Thanks for the fix. I've added fix for tests.

Believe this still needs a test for the exact problem.

Updating the failing test I don't believe covers the change. &title= is not a default value that I can tell and actually probably shouldn't be in the URL I think if no value is present.

Attaching patch with new test case.
About &title= part, I've tested following case - I updated 'test_content_ajax' view and switched off AJAX option and checked URLs and this part was presented. So, I assume this as normal behaviour, as non-AJAX view has the same URL.

Sorry for the a bit wrong patch. Attaching proper one.

The last submitted patch, 25: 3100826-25.patch, failed testing. View results →

The last submitted patch, 26: 3100826-26.patch, failed testing. View results →

Attaching patch with the fix for tests.

The last submitted patch, 29: 3100826-29.patch, failed testing. View results →

Fixing wrong function call.

Believe this is ready! Thanks for adding that additional test!

I'm triaging RTBC issues → . I re-read the IS and the comments. I didn't find any unanswered questions. But there is not a failing test to prove the change works.

Reading the patch I have questions about the tests.

1. +++ b/core/modules/views/tests/src/FunctionalJavascript/PaginationAJAXTest.php
   @@ -46,7 +46,12 @@ protected function setUp(): void {
   +        'title' => $i > 6 ? 'Node ' . $i . ' content' : 'Node ' . $i . ' content default_value',
   

   This is changing the source for the current tests for node 7 -> 11. Does this mean we are losing test coverage?

2. +++ b/core/modules/views/tests/src/FunctionalJavascript/PaginationAJAXTest.php
   @@ -46,7 +46,12 @@ protected function setUp(): void {
   +        'type' => 'page',
   

   Why is this needed?

So the new test is largely a duplicate of the existing one. And it looks like some refactoring could make the differences between the two tests easier to see. But that is probably out of scope. Plus, it is better to fix the bug and have a followup than to hold this up. What would help is a comment in the setup to explain the need for the later nodes to be different.

However, I am not setting this to Needs works. I will leave at RTBC and let another committer make the decision because I don't work with FuncationalJavascript tests.

#33.1 I don't think we've lost test coverage, the existing tests have been updated.
#33.2 Fixed on commit.

Committed d251a98 and pushed to 11.x. Also backported to 10.1.x as a non-disruptive bug fix. Thanks!

Automatically closed - issue fixed for 2 weeks with no activity.