Skip to content

Scope $destroy issue in 0.2.18 #2614

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

Closed
pitAlex opened this issue Mar 10, 2016 · 6 comments
Closed

Scope $destroy issue in 0.2.18 #2614

pitAlex opened this issue Mar 10, 2016 · 6 comments
Labels
Milestone

Comments

@pitAlex
Copy link

pitAlex commented Mar 10, 2016

Prior to this version when leaving a state, $scope $destroy was called first then the $scope of the new state was made then $stateChangeSuccess was called. Now I see order change completely: first the new state's $scope is made then $stateChangeSuccess is called then $scope $destroy is called on the previous state. Is this part of the new changes? Because its messing up the way I handle some elements design between states.

@christopherthielen christopherthielen added this to the 0.2.19 milestone Mar 14, 2016
@christopherthielen
Copy link
Contributor

Fixed in 84fd412

I recommend using ver 0.2.15 until 0.2.19 is released, if the behavior in 0.2.18 is a problem for you.

@dmitry-dedukhin
Copy link

Could 0.2.19 be released sooner than usually?
This bug breaks many cases.
For example, if somebody doing some cleanup in services on scope destroy, then at the moment the new data (which was set in service on new scope init) could be cleaned up!

@christopherthielen
Copy link
Contributor

@dmitry-dedukhin I recommend using 0.2.15 (the release prior to the one where this bug was introduced) until 0.2.19 is released.

@dmitry-dedukhin
Copy link

@christopherthielen I've updated from 0.2.15 a month ago.
And as far as I remember this update was caused by two $stateChangeStart events bug in 0.2.15. This was critical for me so reverting is not an option...

@phazei
Copy link

phazei commented May 11, 2016

Is there even going to be a 0.2.19? It's a pretty bad state to leave the 0.2.x branch in... :(

@christopherthielen
Copy link
Contributor

There will be a 0.2.19. I can only do so much in my spare time, sorry.

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

No branches or pull requests

4 participants