Content
View differences
Updated by Parimal Satyal 10 months ago
###
### Steps to reproduce
* 1. Go to notification center
* 2. Open one work package
*
3. Add a comment, don't submit
*
4. Switch to another notification
* Then open another work package
* Add a comment, submit.
* Swith to another notification
### What is the buggy behavior?
* When you write a comment to a work package, and then either:
* submit it
* leave it in an edit state
* remove what you've typed
* Even in cases where there are "Unsaved changes" alert being shown, that has no unsaved changes, clicking effect on another the page (the other notification will show is already loaded)
* the 'unsaved changes' error.
* This behaviour will then continue every time you move dialog keeps showing up with each navigation to a new notification
* If there are unsaved changes, another notification, even after removing all characters from the new notification will load anyway, despite the warning being shown (so 'Cancel' as no effect) and the user still loses context.
* The unsaved changes will 'remain', and the dialogue keeps showing.
comment
### What is the expected behavior?
* The unsaved 1. Unsaved changes dialog is only shown when there are indeed unsaved changes
* When it's shown, alert allows you to cancel the navigation does _not_ load the new view unless the user clicks on 'Leave page' (or equivalent)
###
#### References:
<br>
https://github.com/hotwired/turbo/issues/610#issuecomment-3159551931
### Steps to reproduce
*
*
*
3.
*
4.
* Then open another work package
* Add a comment, submit.
* Swith to another notification
### What is the buggy behavior?
* When you write a comment to a work package, and then either:
* submit it
* leave it in an edit state
* remove what you've typed
* Even in cases where there are
*
* This behaviour will then continue every time you move
* If there are unsaved changes,
* The unsaved changes will 'remain', and the dialogue keeps showing.
* The unsaved
* When it's shown,
#### References:
<br>
https://github.com/hotwired/turbo/issues/610#issuecomment-3159551931