Closed mzazrivec closed 4 years ago
Jansa backport details:
$ git log -1
commit 359a7c03945f0a573a233f25c37ae496761eb839
Author: Martin Hradil <mhradil@redhat.com>
Date: Tue Jun 30 19:21:57 2020 +0200
Merge pull request #443 from mzazrivec/add_support_for_local_validation_of_box_tab_and_field
Add support for local validation of box, tab and field
(cherry picked from commit 334a9ea4ef5124e4b9c0c35ec1f9b2703bcd0b33)
Backporting this to ivanchuk conflicts because of https://github.com/ManageIQ/ui-components/pull/408. Should I backport that as well, or resolve conflicts retaining the original message with 'group'?
@simaishi I think it would be safe to backport https://github.com/ManageIQ/ui-components/pull/408/files as well.
Thanks @mzazrivec, backported #408 as well.
Ivanchuk backport details:
$ git log -1
commit 4fbdf306e09958a8dbf1a662b3453fd6a18f193f
Author: Martin Hradil <mhradil@redhat.com>
Date: Tue Jun 30 19:21:57 2020 +0200
Merge pull request #443 from mzazrivec/add_support_for_local_validation_of_box_tab_and_field
Add support for local validation of box, tab and field
(cherry picked from commit 334a9ea4ef5124e4b9c0c35ec1f9b2703bcd0b33)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1741633
This PR implements field, tab & box level validation when creating / editing field, tab & box in current dialog editor. Should a particular validation fail, the
Save
button will be disabled and button title will be set with the validation message. Previously, the validation would take place on the service dialog level, which seemed counter-intuitive.Field validation example:
Box validation example:
Tab validation example:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1741633