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

OT: Research SplitOperation#insertionPosition transformation #8873

Closed
scofalik opened this issue Jan 20, 2021 · 2 comments
Closed

OT: Research SplitOperation#insertionPosition transformation #8873

scofalik opened this issue Jan 20, 2021 · 2 comments
Labels
package:engine resolution:expired This issue was closed due to lack of feedback. status:stale type:improvement This issue reports a possible enhancement of an existing feature.

Comments

@scofalik
Copy link
Contributor

📝 Provide a description of the improvement

Followup for #8870.

In #8870 I found a bug that happened in some undo scenarios involving split operation. Upon research, it appeared that in split x insert transformation, SplitOperation#insertionPosition is transformed in a, let's say, naive way, that in some scenarios was incorrect. This only concerns split operations that are a result of undo (so, reversed merge operations).

SplitOperation#insertionPosition is transformed in multiple places in OT and it could be incorrectly transformed in some of them as well.

@scofalik scofalik added type:improvement This issue reports a possible enhancement of an existing feature. package:engine labels Jan 20, 2021
@Reinmar Reinmar added this to the backlog milestone Jan 21, 2021
@pomek pomek removed this from the backlog milestone Feb 21, 2022
@CKEditorBot
Copy link
Collaborator

There has been no activity on this issue for the past year. We've marked it as stale and will close it in 30 days. We understand it may still be relevant, so if you're interested in the solution, leave a comment or reaction under this issue.

@CKEditorBot
Copy link
Collaborator

We've closed your issue due to inactivity over the last year. We understand that the issue may still be relevant. If so, feel free to open a new one (and link this issue to it).

@CKEditorBot CKEditorBot added the resolution:expired This issue was closed due to lack of feedback. label Nov 13, 2023
@CKEditorBot CKEditorBot closed this as not planned Won't fix, can't repro, duplicate, stale Nov 13, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
package:engine resolution:expired This issue was closed due to lack of feedback. status:stale type:improvement This issue reports a possible enhancement of an existing feature.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants