1067251 - [Contacts] [Regression] Cannot reset phone field when editing a contact

Status: VERIFIED FIXED

(Firefox OS Graveyard :: Gaia::Contacts, defect)

Description

[Jose Manuel Cantera]

STR: Edit or add contact

input content on a phone number field. Click on the reset button ('x'). 

Actual:

Nothing happens

Expected:

Field content is deleted

Comment 1

[Jose Manuel Cantera]

[Blocking Requested - why for this release]:This is a clear failure to be perceived by the user as low quality

Comment 2

[Jose Manuel Cantera]

The following error appears on the console:

[JavaScript Error: "TypeError: input.parentNode.nextElementSibling is null" {file: "app://communications.gaiamobile.org/contacts/js/views/form.js" line: 178}]

Comment 3

[Jose Manuel Cantera]

Attachment: 24042.html

Comment 4

[Maria Angeles Oteo (:oteo)]

Triage: not blocking but we should fix this and ask for approval, including it in the 2.1 meta

Comment 5

[Francisco Jordano [:arcturus] [:francisco]]

Comment on attachment 8489299 [details]
24042.html

I've been trying this, the reset of the field works perfectly, but noticed that when we reset the fiend, the carrier is not disabled and we can write on the field.

To me is a minor issue, Jose do you prefer to do it in this bug or do a follow up?

In my opinion, we should take this patch, ask for approval as it's pretty low risk and small and file a new one, that we can have it on the backlog.

Comment 6

[Jose Manuel Cantera]

(In reply to Francisco Jordano [:arcturus] [:francisco] from comment #5)
> Comment on attachment 8489299 [details]
> 24042.html
> 
> I've been trying this, the reset of the field works perfectly, but noticed
> that when we reset the fiend, the carrier is not disabled and we can write
> on the field.
> 
> To me is a minor issue, Jose do you prefer to do it in this bug or do a
> follow up?

A follow up is more suitable as the behavior you are describing is the same it was originally

> 
> In my opinion, we should take this patch, ask for approval as it's pretty
> low risk and small and file a new one, that we can have it on the backlog.

oh yes

Comment 7

[Jose Manuel Cantera]

landed in master:

https://github.com/mozilla-b2g/gaia/commit/00b0859b0d5379221a72c0f9e402d2550155c9b9

Comment 8

[Jose Manuel Cantera]

(In reply to Jose Manuel Cantera from comment #6)
> (In reply to Francisco Jordano [:arcturus] [:francisco] from comment #5)
> > Comment on attachment 8489299 [details]
> > 24042.html
> > 
> > I've been trying this, the reset of the field works perfectly, but noticed
> > that when we reset the fiend, the carrier is not disabled and we can write
> > on the field.
> > 
> > To me is a minor issue, Jose do you prefer to do it in this bug or do a
> > follow up?
> 
> A follow up is more suitable as the behavior you are describing is the same
> it was originally
> 
> > 
> > In my opinion, we should take this patch, ask for approval as it's pretty
> > low risk and small and file a new one, that we can have it on the backlog.
> 
> oh yes

I correct myself. I remind of discussing this issue with our old friend Ayman. And we agreed on the current behavior. This is due to the fact that you may have entered a carrier but then you decide to reset the number because you realize it was not correct, but you don't want to lose the content on the carrier field or even disable as it is likely you will enter new info on the phone field. Si I believe we don't need a follow-up

thanks

Comment 9

[Francisco Jordano [:arcturus] [:francisco]]

Perfect, then the only thing we have left is to ask for 2.1 approval, can you do it Jose?

Comment 10

[Jose Manuel Cantera]

Comment on attachment 8489299 [details]
24042.html

[Approval Request Comment]
[Bug caused by] (feature/regressing bug #): Contacts Form visual refresh
[User impact] if declined: High. Low quality perceived. 
[Testing completed]: Yes
[Risk to taking this patch] (and alternatives if risky): Very low
[String changes made]:

Comment 11

[Ryan VanderMeulen [:RyanVM]]

v2.1: https://github.com/mozilla-b2g/gaia/commit/6b56eb53abc18dc2df9426d0eb071ac255a2cd33

Comment 12

[Lancy(Leave from Mozilla)]

Attachment: Verify_Video_Flame.MP4

This issue has been verified successfully on Flame 2.1 & 2.2.
See attachment: Verify_Video_Flame.MP4
Reproducing rate: 0/10

Flame v2.1 version:
Gaia-Rev        db2e84860f5a7cc334464618c6ea9e92ff82e9dd
Gecko-Rev       https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-b2g34_v2_1/rev/211eae88f119
Build-ID        20141126001202
Version         34.0

Flame 2.2 version:
Gaia-Rev        824a61cccec4c69be9a86ad5cb629a1f61fa142f
Gecko-Rev       https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/acde07cb4e4d
Build-ID        20141125040209
Version         36.0a1