Skip to content

Various flow related fixes - #18547

Merged
rullzer merged 6 commits into
masterfrom
bugfix/flow
Dec 27, 2019
Merged

Various flow related fixes#18547
rullzer merged 6 commits into
masterfrom
bugfix/flow

Conversation

@juliusknorr

@juliusknorrjuliusknorr commented Dec 23, 2019

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@rullzerrullzer mentioned this pull request Dec 23, 2019
18 tasks
blizzz
blizzz previously requested changes Dec 23, 2019

@blizzzblizzz left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I always see "The configuration is invalid" even if it is not (existing and new rules). Despite saving works.

@juliusknorr

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

I always see "The configuration is invalid" even if it is not (existing and new rules). Despite saving works.

Ah indeed, seems to only occur with multiple checks. Fix pushed.

@blizzzblizzz left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks, works now!

Just, an other thing: unconditional flows (without a check) were OK before. Rejecting them could potentially break older once… Not that I have an idea where they would be useful. That might come back to us. Otherwise, +1.

@kesselbkesselb left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

  • Fix app store link and hide it for users (fix #18495#18500)
  • Flow: Invalid rule will emit a log message #18496

👍

@skjnldsvskjnldsv added 4. to release Ready to be released and/or waiting for tests to finish and removed 3. to review Waiting for reviews labels Dec 23, 2019
@juliusknorr

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Just, an other thing: unconditional flows (without a check) were OK before. Rejecting them could potentially break older once… Not that I have an idea where they would be useful.

Yes, I was thinking the same, but I also could not think of a rule that would make sense without any check.

@blizzz

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Just, an other thing: unconditional flows (without a check) were OK before. Rejecting them could potentially break older once… Not that I have an idea where they would be useful.

Yes, I was thinking the same, but I also could not think of a rule that would make sense without any check.

Config switch :p

Okay. Existing ones should run, but not be modifyable anymore. Let's just be sure to document it in the release notes.

Signed-off-by: Julius Härtl <jus@bitgrid.net>
Signed-off-by: Julius Härtl <jus@bitgrid.net>
Signed-off-by: Julius Härtl <jus@bitgrid.net>
Signed-off-by: Julius Härtl <jus@bitgrid.net>
Signed-off-by: Julius Härtl <jus@bitgrid.net>
Signed-off-by: Julius Härtl <jus@bitgrid.net>
@rullzerrullzer mentioned this pull request Dec 27, 2019
13 tasks
@rullzer
rullzer merged commit f3232fc into masterDec 27, 2019
@rullzer
rullzer deleted the bugfix/flow branch December 27, 2019 13:29
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

4. to releaseReady to be released and/or waiting for tests to finishbugfeature: workflows

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Flow: fail to pick a third party entity event Flow: Browse the app store is not possible for users

5 participants

@juliusknorr@blizzz@kesselb@skjnldsv@rullzer