search

CDLUC3 / dmptool

DMPTool version of the DMPRoadmap codebase
https://dmptool.org
MIT License
57 stars 13 forks source link

Plan / Follow-up Tab: Existing Research Outputs are lost when adding a new Research Output #447

Closed terrywbrady closed 1 year ago

terrywbrady commented 1 year ago

Please complete the following fields as applicable:

What version of the DMPRoadmap code are you running? (e.g. v2.2.0)

v4.0.7

Expected behaviour:

Plan / Follow-up Tab: The list of Research Outputs should be modifiable.

Actual behaviour:

Plan / Follow-up Tab: Existing Research Outputs are lost when adding a new Research Output

Steps to reproduce:

  1. Save some Research Outputs on the Follow-up tab.
  2. Return to the tab
  3. Add new Research Outputs and Save
  4. Note the changes to the list
briri commented 1 year ago

figured out the issue. I had neglected to include all of the existing related identifier values as hidden fields. The form submission was just taking whatever was passed and replacing what it had.

Thanks for bringing this to my attention @terrywbrady

briri commented 1 year ago

Noting here that the items being lost are 'related identifier' not 'research outputs'

mariapraetzellis commented 1 year ago

I tested this and can now add new Research Outputs to an existing list under the Follow-Up tab. The additional outputs are added and do not remove any existing outputs.

Br-Johnson commented 1 year ago

I tested this just now, and when I added a new article to our research outputs and it did stick without wiping out the others! :)

However :( there are also now a number of un-related research outputs listed that I did not put there (though the unrelated research outputs do not appear in our final DMP: https://doi.org/10.48321/D1CW23

One of the research outputs I didn't list is yours @mariapraetzellis, so perhaps this is a result of you doing some testing? the first two listed are outputs I entered, but the remainder I did not.

image

briri commented 1 year ago

very strange. Thanks for bringing this to our attention @Br-Johnson.

briri commented 1 year ago

This has been patched @Br-Johnson and we've run a script that re-fetched the citation information and attached it to the correct DOIs.

Please have a look at your DMP and let me know if anything still looks incorrect.

Br-Johnson commented 1 year ago

Looks like it works great now. Thanks for this!