Task #1547
closed
Task #1503: Testing of the product (9.4.0)
Main form definition, apart from default one, (IdmIdentity) allowed
0%
Description
When I set up a new IdmIdentity form as main, apart from a default one,
this setup then ends up throwing an error (on a user creation agenda) that is not easily connected with the described settings.
Two issues:
1) In general, all forms presented by default should be designed in such a manner that their order and placement in relation to other forms (future newly created forms on the same agenda) can be easily reshuffled, reordered at a later time even with user data connected to it, simply by changing the order of the form. No "default" form should fall outside of all the other forms.
2) There should be a warning message informing the user that the main definition (for any type of form) already exists, and another main one is NOT permitted, and/or the default form should not be evaluated as the main form, in fact. The default should be set as a form number 0, preferrably.
Files
Related issues
Updated by Vít Švanda almost 6 years ago
- Assignee changed from Vít Švanda to milus kotisova
The agenda for create of external user isn't part of the product.
By the way I totally not understand what exactly do you want. We supports only one "default" definition now.
Updated by Radek Tomiška almost 6 years ago
- Target version deleted (
Opal (9.4.0))
Updated by Radek Tomiška almost 6 years ago
- Tracker changed from Defect to Task
- Category changed from Identities to Eav
- Priority changed from Normal to Low
This ticket contains a confusing description, but i try to extract some requirements from it :)
1) If I understand it right - you created new main form definition for identities and you are surprised, the newly created form definition is really main? I can add some warning message "The form is marked as main , really ..."? Or I can do it other way - disable to change main form definition, but we need to analyze this change before, if it is not obstacle for some module (init data, acc).
2) The second requirement, what i was able to extract from description above (i hope so:)) is about sorting of forms rendered on identity tab? Which criteria do you want to use for sorting (code of the definition, add some explicit order ...)?
Updated by Radek Tomiška almost 6 years ago
- Related to Task #1565: Eav: Add warning, when main form definition is changed added
Updated by Radek Tomiška almost 6 years ago
- Related to Feature #1566: Eav: Add form definition order for FE added
Updated by Radek Tomiška almost 6 years ago
- Status changed from New to Rejected
- Target version set to Quartz (9.6.0)
I've extracted requirements, which are mentioned above, into new feature requests.