Skip to content

Conversation

@ivantodorovich
Copy link

Steps to reproduce:

  1. Create a form with a notebook, with pages "A", "B", and "C"
  2. In page "B", create another notebook with a name="notebook_B", and pages "1", "2", and "3".
  3. Create a record on this form, and focus on page "B" and then page "3".
  4. Click on the "Edit" button

Result:

  • The page "C" is focused

Expected:

  • Focus shouldn't change

Explanation:

The focused page is handled by the getLocalState and setLocalState methods, which are used to store the focused page index for each notebook on the form.

However, the code doesn't handle properly the case of nested forms: when trying to identify the focused page index, it's looping through all the nested pages.

This commit modifies the selector used to only look for the direct page elements.


I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

Steps to reproduce:

1. Create a form with a notebook, with pages "A", "B", and "C"
2. In page "B", create another notebook with a name="notebook_B", and pages "1",
   "2", and "3".
3. Create a record on this form, and focus on page "B" and then page "3".
4. Click on the "Edit" button

Result:

- The page "C" is focused

Expected:

- Focus shouldn't change

Explanation:

The focused page is handled by the `getLocalState` and `setLocalState` methods,
which are used to store the focused page index for each notebook on the form.

However, the code doesn't handle properly the case of nested forms: when trying
to identify the focused page index, it's looping through all the nested pages.

This commit modifies the selector used to only look for the direct page elements.
@OCA-git-bot
Copy link

This PR has the approved label and has been created more than 5 days ago. It should therefore be ready to merge by a maintainer (or a PSC member if the concerned addon has no declared maintainer). 🤖

@cyrilmanuel
Copy link

hi @pedrobaeza , is it possible to merge this one ?

@pedrobaeza pedrobaeza added this to the 12.0 milestone Nov 26, 2025
@pedrobaeza
Copy link
Member

Hi, I don't think it's worth the ratio risk/benefit to compromise the stability of such an old version for something that can have side effects.

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.

5 participants