- Issue created by @larowlan
- 🇦🇺Australia larowlan 🇦🇺🏝.au GMT+10
I think this is a stable blocker because at present we have data loss.
- 🇺🇸United States tedbow Ithaca, NY, USA
@larowlan re #2 about this being a stable blocker
I agree we should not data loss if 2 users are editing the same entity but I wonder if our goal should be to support this workflow in 1.0 or just prevent it from happening. Just technically supporting doesn't seem like enough, we should have good UX around it and if we can't achieve that it seems like it would better to not support it all.
- 🇧🇪Belgium wim leers Ghent 🇧🇪🇪🇺
AFAICT ✨ Implement time travel (undo/redo/revert) of auto-saved states across devices and users Active is related?
- 🇺🇸United States tedbow Ithaca, NY, USA
I updated the summary to acknowledge the for beta1 we are not supporting concurrent editing.
Also added 🐛 Add rudimentary conflict prevention to the Config Auto-save end-point Active as a child because we have to do this for config entities too
- 🇧🇪Belgium wim leers Ghent 🇧🇪🇪🇺
🐛 Click publish shortly after making a change can lead to error Active should be linked from here per @tedbow's comment at #3520592-13: Clicking publish shortly after making a change can lead to an error → , which ties it to 📌 [PP-1] Enforce conflict enforcement outside of tests and e2e tests Postponed .
