Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[Bug] Existing query params lost when entering loading route #19039

Closed
jrjohnson opened this issue Jul 8, 2020 · 3 comments
Closed

[Bug] Existing query params lost when entering loading route #19039

jrjohnson opened this issue Jul 8, 2020 · 3 comments

Comments

@jrjohnson
Copy link

🐞 Describe the Bug

When an index-loading route is entered during a query param only transition the existing QPs are lost and only the newly set param is retained.

🔬 Minimal Reproduction

I've created a reproduction at https://github.com/jrjohnson/qp-replacement-loading-route-reproduction running the tests will show the failures. You can also navigate to the broken route and click the query param setting buttons.

😕 Actual Behavior

Setting a QP re-sets the existing params to their default value.

🤔 Expected Behavior

Setting a new param should not change existing params.

🌍 Environment

  • Ember: - 3.19.0
  • Node.js/npm: - v12.18.2 / 6.14.5
  • OS: - OSX
  • Browser: - Chrome / Firefox

➕ Additional Context

This was originally reported as a new issue with 3.13 by @jakebixbyavalara in #18683 but I wasn't able to find a linked issue.

Tagging @pzuraq as he was involved in the original issue (and this is probably a result of tracked properties for QPs being introduced in 3.13).

@jrjohnson jrjohnson changed the title Existing query params lost when entering loading route [Bug] Existing query params lost when entering loading route Jul 12, 2020
@jrjohnson
Copy link
Author

I'm no longer sure this is a 3.13 issue, I went all the way back to 2.18 and it still happens there. I've never had a loading route on both an index and main route before with query params so I'm not sure this has ever worked. It still reads as a bug to me, but maybe not a new one.

@rreckonerr
Copy link
Contributor

Ran your reproduction on 3.27.0 and seems like it's already fixed
Feb-13-2021 19-15-08

@jrjohnson
Copy link
Author

Agreed! Working with 3.25.1 for sure. Thanks for updating!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants