Skip to content

Conversation

@R0Wi
Copy link
Member

@R0Wi R0Wi commented Jan 18, 2025

Summary

Checklist

@R0Wi R0Wi requested review from kesselb and szaimen January 18, 2025 22:17
@szaimen szaimen added bug 3. to review Waiting for reviews labels Jan 18, 2025
@szaimen szaimen added this to the Nextcloud 31 milestone Jan 18, 2025
@szaimen szaimen requested review from a team, nfebe, st3iny and susnux and removed request for a team and szaimen January 18, 2025 23:02
This was referenced Jan 21, 2025
@blizzz blizzz mentioned this pull request Jan 29, 2025
1 task
@blizzz blizzz modified the milestones: Nextcloud 31, Nextcloud 32 Jan 29, 2025
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Feb 2, 2025

Hello there,
Thank you so much for taking the time and effort to create a pull request to our Nextcloud project.

We hope that the review process is going smooth and is helpful for you. We want to ensure your pull request is reviewed to your satisfaction. If you have a moment, our community management team would very much appreciate your feedback on your experience with this PR review process.

Your feedback is valuable to us as we continuously strive to improve our community developer experience. Please take a moment to complete our short survey by clicking on the following link: https://cloud.nextcloud.com/apps/forms/s/i9Ago4EQRZ7TWxjfmeEpPkf6

Thank you for contributing to Nextcloud and we hope to hear from you soon!

(If you believe you should not receive this message, you can add yourself to the blocklist.)

@R0Wi R0Wi force-pushed the fix/issue-23666 branch from 21d167a to c6f52e1 Compare April 26, 2025 20:37
@R0Wi R0Wi requested a review from a team as a code owner April 26, 2025 20:37
@R0Wi R0Wi requested review from sorbaugh and removed request for a team April 26, 2025 20:37
@R0Wi
Copy link
Member Author

R0Wi commented Apr 26, 2025

@blizzz I rebased this against the current master and adjusted to code to work with c24ead8.

Would be happy to see a review of this since me and other users are stumbling across the described issue regularly 😄

@R0Wi R0Wi requested a review from blizzz April 26, 2025 20:41
@kesselb kesselb removed their request for review April 28, 2025 11:10
@R0Wi R0Wi force-pushed the fix/issue-23666 branch from c6f52e1 to 4420a2e Compare June 30, 2025 19:37
@R0Wi R0Wi requested a review from a team as a code owner June 30, 2025 19:37
@R0Wi
Copy link
Member Author

R0Wi commented Jun 30, 2025

@susnux may I kindly ask you for a review, please?

@nextcloud-bot nextcloud-bot mentioned this pull request Aug 22, 2025
This was referenced Aug 25, 2025
This was referenced Sep 2, 2025
This was referenced Sep 25, 2025
@skjnldsv skjnldsv modified the milestones: Nextcloud 32, Nextcloud 33 Sep 28, 2025
@R0Wi
Copy link
Member Author

R0Wi commented Nov 2, 2025

@nextcloud/server-frontend anyone who could give me feedback, please?

computed: {
options() {
return [...this.predefinedTypes, this.customValue]
return ['is', '!is'].includes(this.operator) ? this.predefinedTypes : [this.customValue]
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

That does not work, because some predefined types are actually regex, like Images and Office documents, so those needs matches, while the others need is.

So we should have two lists of default values. Ideally things like "PDF documents" should be in both lists, once as regex and once as value to not confuse users.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good catch! Thanks for your feedback @come-nc. I adjusted the code so that it now uses two predefined lists (with some intersections - for example for pdf there's a non-regex and a regex version now).

To be discusses: right now the custom value will only be visible on matches / !matches (regex). We could theoretically also allow custom non-regex mime-types but I didn't want to change this behavior.

Sidenote: I took the liberty to fix the custom values placeholder as well as this needs to be a valid regex

@R0Wi R0Wi force-pushed the fix/issue-23666 branch 3 times, most recently from 53ef912 to 7bd2d6a Compare December 10, 2025 05:18
@R0Wi R0Wi enabled auto-merge December 16, 2025 20:29
@R0Wi
Copy link
Member Author

R0Wi commented Dec 16, 2025

@come-nc the failing cypress tests seem to be unrelated? AFAIK there are no workflowengine E2E tests ...

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Workflowengine "The given regular expression is invalid"

7 participants