Closed (fixed)
Project:
Inline Entity Form
Version:
8.x-1.x-dev
Component:
Code
Priority:
Normal
Category:
Task
Assigned:
Unassigned
Reporter:
Created:
8 Jul 2015 at 12:25 UTC
Updated:
30 Jul 2015 at 15:34 UTC
Jump to comment: Most recent, Most recent file
Comments
Comment #1
woprrr commentedThis is fix the problems ;) you can review please ?
Comment #2
woprrr commentedComment #5
slashrsm commentedPatch doesn't fix the problem. I believe this is the reason:
We should read from field configuration instead of form state.
Comment #6
bojanz commentedWe also have a whole commented out function for this:
How about removing the entire feature? It no longer feels like something a widget should do, cause that means that an API level delete won't have the same effect.
Comment #7
slashrsm commentedAnother thing that also crossed my mind is the fact that the referenced entity won't be deleted if we delete parent entity. This is somewhat confusing IMO as I'd expect for both cases to behave same way.
Could we do this in a way that would also work on API level? Or is this something that should be done in a separate module that would handle this for all referenced entities?
Comment #8
bojanz commentedSeparate module that integrates with entity reference, for sure.
Dave Reid already has a D7 contrib for this, though we'll probably want to revisit the approach for D8.
Comment #9
bojanz commentedRetitling.
Comment #10
bojanz commentedDone.
Comment #12
woprrr commentedHii slashrsm,
For your comment, https://www.drupal.org/node/2529114#comment-10113268
I absolutely do not agree, because the configuration can display a boolean to the deletion of the entity, but we must always be able to delete the line only and not necessarily the entity in all cases. The solution to see if the user has in UX tick removal are entity makes sense for the user.
For me this ticket should be used to enable the functionality to add and the more we did commit, it is a problem from the point of view of using the plugin I think.
Comment #13
slashrsm commentedThis is irrelevant now as we removed this feature from the module (see #8).