sw-url-field component ignores value removal

[shopwareBot]

The sw-url-field administration component seems to have issues with accepting the removal of a previously existing input.

This can be tested wherever you use this component, e.g in configs for plugins and CMS elements:

Steps to reproduce:

• enter a URL in the field
• save by clicking 'save' in the plugin config or 'finish' in the CMS element config
• navigate to the field again (i.e., in CMS element configs, re-open the config) and empty it / remove the input
• save again

Expected result:

• the field should be / remain empty after saving

Actual result:

• instead, the previous value gets restored

Workaround:

• I found that the deletion does go through if you use the input field prefix button to switch between HTTP and HTTPS at least once after the deletion is made and before you hit save.

[shopware-issue-bot[bot]]

We found the following existing issues which may help or are related to your topic:

• sw-url-field component ignores value removal
• sw-url-field removes query parameters from the URL
• sw-url-field / optionally don't remove trailing slash
• sw-text-field issue with idSuffix
• Plugin removes last slash of uri
• Move outer padding into inner in sw-url-field secure prefix
• [github] Move outer padding into inner in sw-url-field secure prefix
• sw-number-field unexpected behavior

[shopwareBot]

[public] Automated response: This issue is linked to the internal issue https://shopware.atlassian.net/browse/NEXT-34457.

[created from NEXT-34457, comment 485855]

[janobi]

This was first reported for 6.5.8.6 and is still an issue in 6.6.5.1.

[shopwareBot]

[public] Hello,

Within our company roadmap and work capacity, we try to address each bug or improvement request but admit that not each one will be resolved. To continue our culture of honesty and openness, we are closing this issue to focus on our roadmap on behalf of all Shopware users.

If you feel like this issue is still impacting you, please create a new issue and let us know. Thank you again for your valuable feedback.

[created from NEXT-34457, comment 501207]