Closed lgedgar closed 3 years ago
I feel like this just duplicates 18f13387c7c9d94e95b36f077749997c35dc8ee5 but makes it more of a footgun since the user isn't aware of the underlying issue. A simple typo seems like the most plausible source of problems. In a bigger catalog you could miss one digit and hit a different, valid SKU in the catalog.
Ha yep that's a nice easter egg you have there. ;) I agree and happy to close this with no merge.
assuming the following:
with this commit, user is allowed to edit 1st item and assign it SKU 12345, even though that is associated with a different UPC. since there is not a corresponding products record, the vendorItems record is considered "orphaned"
without this commit, user is not allowed to assign SKU to 1st item, b/c of the orphaned vendorItems record.
the code change basically ignores orphaned records, so they do not prevent user from taking desired action in this particular case.
This also relates to https://github.com/CORE-POS/IS4C/commit/e3eef017dbbcc8fae21568674ab2023267387f2d and https://github.com/CORE-POS/IS4C/commit/b1a1a4d49279d560ab8281794407e31bca3c8ff1