Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

XWIKI-21629: The step order displayed in inline edit is not consistent with the order from objects editor #3644

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Dec 16, 2024

Conversation

Sereza7
Copy link
Contributor

@Sereza7 Sereza7 commented Nov 14, 2024

Jira URL

https://jira.xwiki.org/browse/XWIKI-21629

Changes

Description

  • Removed the operation on the order number that caused confusion
  • Removed similar operations, I searched in the module all uses of mathtool.

Screenshots & Video

On this first screenshot, we can see that the list displayed now starts as expected with the order 0.
Screenshot from 2024-11-14 10-26-07
One of the annex changes is to make sure the options when creating and editing a step are displayed from 0 too. Just changing the displayed order does not break anything, those options had a non visible order that was used programatically and contained the correct value already.
Screenshot from 2024-11-14 10-36-37

Executed Tests

After building the changes, successfully built the docker tests mvn clean install -f xwiki-platform-core/xwiki-platform-tour/xwiki-platform-tour-test/xwiki-platform-tour-test-docker

Expected merging strategy

  • Prefers squash: Yes
  • Backport on branches:
    • None

…t with the order from objects editor

* Removed the operation on the order number that caused confusion
…t with the order from objects editor

* Removed similar operations, I searched in the module all uses of `mathtool`.
@michitux michitux merged commit 950b202 into xwiki:master Dec 16, 2024
1 check passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants