[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ISIS-1709?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Daniel Keir Haywood updated ISIS-1709:
--------------------------------------
Fix Version/s: (was: 2.0.0-M4)
2.0.0-M5
There's a reasonable chance this was fixed in 2.0.0-M4 with the reworking of
command, but haven't checked so keeping it on the board.
> Inconsistent handling of commands vs auditing for objects implementing
> HasTransactionId
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: ISIS-1709
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ISIS-1709
> Project: Isis
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Isis Core
> Affects Versions: 1.15.0
> Reporter: Daniel Keir Haywood
> Assignee: Daniel Keir Haywood
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 2.0.0-M5
>
>
> Noticed that if
> ApplicationUser#updateEmailAddress(...)
> with
> isis.services.audit.objects=none
> isis.services.command.actions=none
> then do get a Command persisted, but don't get any audit records persisted.
> The auditing behaviour is correct, but the command behaviour is wrong.
> What seems to happen is that no CommandFacet is installed
> (ActionAnnotationFacetFactory#processCommand), and then in the
> ObjectMemberAbstract because there is no command facet it defaults to
> "// if no facet, assume do want to execute right now, but only persist
> (eventually) if hinted."
> My guess is that the hinting does occur
> (PersistenceSession#completeCommandFromInteractionAndClearDomainEvents as
> objects are dirtied.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
