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

Overrides shouldn't be applicable to unsynced patterns #61610

Closed
jameskoster opened this issue May 13, 2024 · 1 comment · Fixed by #61639
Closed

Overrides shouldn't be applicable to unsynced patterns #61610

jameskoster opened this issue May 13, 2024 · 1 comment · Fixed by #61639
Assignees
Labels
[Feature] Patterns A collection of blocks that can be synced (previously reusable blocks) or unsynced Needs Dev Ready for, and needs developer efforts [Status] In Progress Tracking issues with work in progress [Type] Bug An existing feature does not function as intended

Comments

@jameskoster
Copy link
Contributor

Currently it's possible to 'Enable overrides' when editing an unsynced pattern in focus mode. This doesn't really make sense, given all block properties in an unsynced pattern are editable post insertion. Nothing is synced, so there's nothing to override.

@jameskoster jameskoster added [Type] Bug An existing feature does not function as intended [Feature] Patterns A collection of blocks that can be synced (previously reusable blocks) or unsynced Needs Dev Ready for, and needs developer efforts labels May 13, 2024
@talldan
Copy link
Contributor

talldan commented May 14, 2024

Thanks for catching that, I've added this to the iteration issue - #59819

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
[Feature] Patterns A collection of blocks that can be synced (previously reusable blocks) or unsynced Needs Dev Ready for, and needs developer efforts [Status] In Progress Tracking issues with work in progress [Type] Bug An existing feature does not function as intended
Projects
Status: Done
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants