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

Bugfix/FOUR-15004: PMQL in record list doesnt work with pm variables #1614

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jul 24, 2024

Conversation

agustinbusso
Copy link
Contributor

@agustinbusso agustinbusso commented Jun 11, 2024

Issue & Reproduction Steps

Please see https://processmaker.atlassian.net/browse/FOUR-15004

To reproduce:

  • Create a screen
  • Add an input with a default and name it user (you can use your custom example)
  • Add a select list of type data connector (you can use the users endpoint)
  • Configure Options Variable: response.data
  • Type of Value Returned: Object
  • Content {{data.username}}
  • Data connector: Users
  • Endpoint ListAll
  • Add a PMQL: data.username="{{user}}" (user is the name of the input you added before)
  • Go to preview and type some valid user in the input to make the pmql trigger and change the option list of the select

Working video

Screen.Recording.2024-06-10.at.15.39.42.mov

Solution

  • Fix PMQL render and code refactor for dataconnector
  • Fix issue with cacheEnabled
  • Fix NL to PMQL to call microservice for PMQL input in select lists
  • Add nonce to use last call in select list dataconnector

How to Test

  • Follow steps above. You can test also type collections for data source

Related Tickets & Packages

Code Review Checklist

  • I have pulled this code locally and tested it on my instance, along with any associated packages.
  • This code adheres to ProcessMaker Coding Guidelines.
  • This code includes a unit test or an E2E test that tests its functionality, or is covered by an existing test.
  • This solution fixes the bug reported in the original ticket.
  • This solution does not alter the expected output of a component in a way that would break existing Processes.
  • This solution does not implement any breaking changes that would invalidate documentation or cause existing Processes to fail.
  • This solution has been tested with enterprise packages that rely on its functionality and does not introduce bugs in those packages.
  • This code does not duplicate functionality that already exists in the framework or in ProcessMaker.
  • This ticket conforms to the PRD associated with this part of ProcessMaker.

ci:develop

Copy link

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants