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
update local version of containing folder when a new items comes in from remote #759
Comments
PS: a |
Next step:
|
This is marked as blocker, but I think nobody currently understands the actual implications of the wrong behaviour, and yet we really want to release a new stable version with all the bugfixes since 0.11.0. @michielbdejong Do you think we should not release without fixing this? Or can we keep the blocker label, but at least release 0.11.1 to get all the other fixes out? |
Yes, congrats on the 0.11.1 release! Ping me when you or someone else has time to pair on this one. |
Unfortunately, our Internet connection here on Dominica is not sufficient for remote pairing. |
Hey @michielbdejong, I thought I remembered that, on our last call, you said you'd make some unit tests to illustrate the issue, do you think you'll have some time to do that soon? |
Yer, that would explain it to the person who wants to fix it then. |
Yes, but we'll do that as part of the pairing session. And then immediately fix it while we're at it. Let me know as soon as someone has time. |
If you just write a test, someone can pick it up and fix it without pairing. As I said, Internet connection here is not sufficient for remote pairing. Edit: or it'll have to wait until mid February. |
@skddc do you want to pair on this now? |
I can pair on this now. |
When a folder listing is fetched, and we become aware of items that exist remotely but not locally, the entry in
node.local.itemsMap
is set tofalse
. This is good because it means when you do getListing, you only see items that actually exist in the cache.However, when such an item is then later fetched, its entry in the containing folder's
node.local.itemsMap
should be changed fromfalse
totrue
, and we're not currently doing that.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: