When we have 7.x-1.2 and field_collection 7.x-1.x-beta there is a serious problem.

When we create a new node, all fields in the node are not correctly saved.

If I create a new node, I can see in database all data is being saved, but is like it is not correctly linked to a new node.

The when I go to edit this new node, all data are not there, you even need to select another time the term that give permission to a node, and all field collection are replaced for a new one.

In this type content I have fields collection an other kind of fields, like text, number, and the tanoxomy reference field, I sure the problem is a mix with field collection because I have other type content without field_collection and works perfectly.

is this a bug from this module or from field collection?

Comments

ludwig.rubio’s picture

Issue summary: View changes
Dave Cohen’s picture

Project: Taxonomy Access Control Lite » Field collection
Issue tags: -need save twice

Unclear to me whether the problem is tac_lite or field collection. I'm moving the issue there not to imply that's where the problem lies, but to make the maintainers aware and to ask their opinion.

ludwig.rubio, can you clarify what the symptom is? Are you saying that when a node is created there is a problem, while when a node is updated there is no problem?

For what it's worth, tac_lite should have no impact on what data is saved along with the node. It should only affect what is written to the node_access table.

jmuzz’s picture

Project: Field collection » Taxonomy Access Control Lite

So the data is there but it can't be seen? I'm going to guess the tac_lite module is setting it to deny access to view it. Does tac_lite assume that the taxonomy reference is in an entity that has a uid or some other concept of owner? If so, that's likely the source of the error. Field collections do not have an owner. This also causes problems for people trying to get the field_permissions module to work. This issue may be a duplicate of #1954124 in a way.

Dave Cohen’s picture

That would be #1954124: Fields part of field collection are ownerless.

@ludwig.rubio, can you tell whether this is a dupe?