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

fix(ticketrecurrents): remove is_recursive to hide child entities checkbox #19244

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Mar 25, 2025

Conversation

MyvTsv
Copy link
Contributor

@MyvTsv MyvTsv commented Mar 21, 2025

  • I have read the CONTRIBUTING document.
  • I have performed a self-review of my code.
  • I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works.
  • This change requires a documentation update.

Description

  • It fixes !36797
  • This PR removes the is_recursive field from the glpi_ticketrecurrents table, because the concept of recursivity was not necessary and led to confusion. This might suggest that recurring tickets were also created in all child entities. Since this field has no impact on them, it was not relevant to display it.

Screenshots (if appropriate):

Capture d’écran du 2025-03-21 11-10-30

@MyvTsv MyvTsv self-assigned this Mar 21, 2025
@MyvTsv MyvTsv requested review from stonebuzz and Rom1-B March 21, 2025 10:20
@stonebuzz
Copy link
Contributor

note that with is_recursive it was possible to ‘see’ the configuration of a recurring ticket in the sub-entity but without being able to update them (logical)

@MyvTsv MyvTsv marked this pull request as ready for review March 24, 2025 14:27
@stonebuzz stonebuzz added the bug label Mar 25, 2025
@stonebuzz stonebuzz added this to the 10.0.19 milestone Mar 25, 2025
@trasher
Copy link
Contributor

trasher commented Mar 25, 2025

@stonebuzz set milestone to 10.0.19; but PR targets main.

If that's a bug (sounds like it is), it should target 10.0/bf branch.

@cconard96
Copy link
Contributor

cconard96 commented Mar 25, 2025

I don't fully understand the confusion, but I also can't say there isn't a use for having this flag here.

Even if it is a bug, I don't think it is a good idea to target 10.0. There are too many unknowns IMO and removing a feature that has existed over a decade and affects visibility seems far too dangerous.

@stonebuzz stonebuzz removed this from the 10.0.19 milestone Mar 25, 2025
@stonebuzz
Copy link
Contributor

stonebuzz commented Mar 25, 2025

@stonebuzz set milestone to 10.0.19; but PR targets main.

If that's a bug (sounds like it is), it should target 10.0/bf branch.

Sorry it's for main

@cedric-anne cedric-anne added this to the 11.0.0 milestone Mar 25, 2025
@cedric-anne cedric-anne merged commit 3729fe9 into glpi-project:main Mar 25, 2025
7 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants