-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 392
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鈥檒l occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
More survey improvements #3133
More survey improvements #3133
Conversation
94a47d9
to
e4f3272
Compare
@deivid-rodriguez after merging #3091 I'm getting conflicts 馃槥 |
Since it might be different depending on the type of field. For example, for a text field dependent on a checkbox, we'll need to check the "checked" property of the checkbox, not its value.
Keeping them on a single column is weird and very unflexible.
Answer is a different model not involved here, so this version is less confusing, I think.
This is a similar refactoring to what was done in the backend. Instead of using isolated form helpers, use a proper form builder. This came with the fix/feature of adding proper support for client side validations, improving user experience and reducing server load.
e4f3272
to
3a13d5c
Compare
Fixed, sorry about that, I'm not sure why all those conflicts are generated on my "PRs on top of PRs"... 馃槥 |
Data migrations are tough, I found a few problems in the migration introduced in this PR. Keeping the WIP label until I get to fix them! |
@deivid-rodriguez maybe it's due to squashing the commits on merge? 馃槙 |
I hadn't think about that, and it would make sense indeed... |
PostgreSQL casting was saving the new text bodies as "\"value\"".
9682b34
to
0b317e1
Compare
Fixed the migration and a few more issues regarding field disabling. Should be ready now. |
馃帺 What? Why?
This PR sits on top of #3091. It keeps refactoring surveys (mainly the frontend), and adds a couple of noticiable changes:
馃搶 Related Issues
None.
馃搵 Subtasks
CHANGELOG
entry馃摲 Screenshots (optional)
None.