Closed (fixed)
Project:
View reference
Version:
6.x-3.4
Component:
User interface
Priority:
Normal
Category:
Bug report
Assigned:
Unassigned
Reporter:
Created:
5 Feb 2011 at 00:27 UTC
Updated:
7 Mar 2011 at 23:17 UTC
After saving the node referencing the view, back in the node edit form, view reference value has disappeared from the field.
Comments
Comment #1
danielb commentedWorks fine for me. Will need more information like steps to reproduce, or code samples / patches, to consider a bug report.
Comment #2
R2-D8 commentedSame problem here:
When editing a node with a viewreference-field that has already been referenced there is no prepopulated default-value anymore. Saving such a node removes the referenced value entirely.
I reverted to 6.x-3.3 for now - no problem there.
Comment #3
danielb commentedAlright I managed to reproduce this with the autocomplete widget
Comment #4
danielb commentedcheers, Try 3.5
Comment #5
jadwigo commentedAfter this update the 'views that can be referenced' values are gone again,
for the 4th time...
--edit--
in this case it's the dropdown version, still looking into it
--edit 2--
sorry for the false alarm, after another test it was only my testserver that had an older update.
Comment #6
RalphSleigh commentedI am still having issues with 6.x-3.5
I have a view reference set up: required, one value allowed and only one view can be referenced.
When creating/editing the content type the drop down is pre-populated with the allowed view, but it's not saved, the database simply contains 0 instead of the view id.
If I disable the required flag and edit the content the dropdown displays none, selecting the view and saving it works.
Comment #7
danielb commentedYou are describing a different issue (which I can't replicate btw).
Comment #8
avanish12 commentedHow you can Closed this issue it is still there same thing is happening with me
When edit node and apply view it's fine in preview mode but when save node
View field reset means not saving view in node.
Open this issue or provide any patches for same.
Comment #9
avanish12 commentedComment #10
danielb commentedThis issue was reopened in #6 and describes a scenario different to the one that was addressed and fixed. You've also started another issue regarding your problem, so I don't know why you're confusing things by opening this one.