Bug 536015 - Manual refresh option ignored for tables
Summary: Manual refresh option ignored for tables
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: Sirius
Classification: Modeling
Component: Table (show other bugs)
Version: 5.0.0   Edit
Hardware: PC Windows 10
: P3 normal (vote)
Target Milestone: ---   Edit
Assignee: Project Inbox CLA
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords: triaged
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2018-06-18 11:04 EDT by Pierre Guilet CLA
Modified: 2018-07-18 05:17 EDT (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:

Attachments
project to reproduce (13.52 KB, application/x-zip-compressed)
2018-06-18 11:04 EDT, Pierre Guilet CLA 		no flags Details
View All Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Pierre Guilet CLA 2018-06-18 11:04:42 EDT 
Created attachment 274510 [details]
project to reproduce

Manual refresh is ignored for table.

Any semantic change will be applied directly without manual refresh needed.

Steps to reproduce:

- Import attached projects
- uncheck automatic refresh in preference
- open the model with generic editor and add an EClass and rename one and save.
- open the table and cross table

KO the added element is present and the renamed element is renamed effectively.
Comment 1 Pierre-Charles David CLA 2018-06-18 11:49:03 EDT 
Apparently it used to work in Sirius 5.0.0, so it's a regression. It might be related with the changes made for bug #432400 (not sure, but it's one of the few recent changes which impact tables).
Comment 2 Florian Barbin CLA 2018-06-21 03:08:30 EDT 
The scenario suggest that the table is refreshed at openning. But to reproduce this issue, the table has to be opened before modifying the semantic resource.
Comment 3 Pierre Guilet CLA 2018-06-21 11:26:59 EDT 
In fact it seems it does not work on Sirius 5.0.0 for table too.
The scenario used could have been sligthly different.
Comment 4 Pierre-Charles David CLA 2018-07-18 05:17:10 EDT 
Moving out of 6.0.1 as according to the comments above it does not seem like a regression after all (or at least not a recent one).