- Issue created by @rodrigoaguilera
- Merge request !10332Issue #3489707: Support multiple implementations for hook_field_widget_third_party_settings_form β (Open) created by rodrigoaguilera
- πͺπΈSpain rodrigoaguilera Barcelona
Weird. The tests are not failing where they are supposed to.
The solution to fixing the test should be in core/modules/field_ui/src/Form/EntityFormDisplayEditForm.php protected function thirdPartySettingsForm().
Adding:
$settings_form[$module] = ($settings_form[$module] ?? []) + $hook( - π¨π¦Canada Charlie ChX Negyesi πCanada
don't forget field_formatter_third_party_settings_form as well
- πͺπΈSpain rodrigoaguilera Barcelona
Seems like trying to fail the test on purpose, changing assertNotEmpty for assertEmpty, also passes the test so I'm clueless about what is happening with that test :(
- πͺπΈSpain rodrigoaguilera Barcelona
Seems like it was an issue with not declaring the schema for the new third party setting field.
I also squashed the experiments that I did while I didn't have a proper dev enviroment.In the last two commits I add just the test, failing in the correct place and the the simple fix.
The test only checks widgets, not formatters but since it was the same fix for both I didn't find it very useful to duplicate testing there.
- π¨π¦Canada Charlie ChX Negyesi πCanada
Thanks for the rapid fix, I like it but I can't RTBC it because I suggested the heart of the change so it would be somewhat RTBC'ing my own code. Maybe others don't quite like the succinct version and want core to elaborate on it? I dunno.
- πΊπΈUnited States nicxvan
Sorry since this is one of two exceptions I think we need a test for both to prevent a regression more than prove the fix works.
- πͺπΈSpain rodrigoaguilera Barcelona
Sure. Added tests for the formatters as well