Checking relevance of an inner repeat group should be possible even if its parent group does not exist yet #710
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Closes #5469
What has been done to verify that this works as intended?
I've tested the fix manually with ODK Collect and added automated tests.
Why is this the best possible solution? Were any other approaches considered?
The problem was that in nested repeats we weren't able to check the relevance of an inner group if its parent group didn't exist yet. It caused an NPE. This is a small fix and probably there is nothing to discuss here.
How does this change affect users? Describe intentional changes to behavior and behavior that could have accidentally been affected by code changes. In other words, what are the regression risks?
It should just fix the issue and have no side effects. It's a small fix so it's rather safe but it would be good to play with nested repeats more in the future. I will add that to the todo list that we use with the QA team.
Do we need any specific form for testing your changes? If so, please attach one.
The form from: getodk/collect#5264 for example
Does this change require updates to documentation? If so, please file an issue here and include the link below.
No.