Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

ETP-52: Hook selector for record cloning selects only one hook #444

Open
Amar-Etendo opened this issue Jul 22, 2024 · 0 comments
Open

ETP-52: Hook selector for record cloning selects only one hook #444

Amar-Etendo opened this issue Jul 22, 2024 · 0 comments
Assignees
Labels
bug Something isn't working

Comments

@Amar-Etendo
Copy link
Contributor

Amar-Etendo commented Jul 22, 2024

Error's description

Hook selector for record cloning selects only one hook

Steps to reproduce the error

  1. Implement a hook for the invoice entity that performs some action in the postCopy method (e.g., changing a value in a field of an invoice).
  2. Implement a second hook for the invoice entity that also performs an action in the postCopy method.
  3. Assign different priorities to the hooks. Ensure one hook has a higher priority (lower number) than the other.
  4. Perform a cloning operation on an invoice entity.
  5. Notice that only the hook with the highest priority (lowest number) is executed, while the other hook(s) are not executed.

Expected behavior

It should execute all the hooks for entity in sequence based on their priority order.

Affected Version

¿ Latest/Specific ?

Version number: 24.2.1

Solution Design (optional)

Other test cases

Given:

When:

Then:

@valeg-etendo valeg-etendo changed the title EPL-1706: Hook selector for record cloning selects only one hook ETP-52: Hook selector for record cloning selects only one hook Jul 30, 2024
@valeg-etendo valeg-etendo added the bug Something isn't working label Jul 30, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants