fix: prevent 3-way merge from reverting sequential single-user edits

The server's 3-way content merge was incorrectly triggering on sequential
edits by the same user. When a user checked then unchecked a checklist
item, the merge saw local === base (both unchecked) and kept the server's
checked state, silently discarding the uncheck.

Now the merge only runs when there's an actual concurrent edit
(baseVersion < existing.version), meaning another user saved between the
client's load and this save. For single-user sequential edits, the
client's content is used directly.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
Frederic Cabassut
2026-03-22 18:51:14 +01:00
co-authored by Claude Opus 4.6
parent 6eb35e9df2
commit 5a2a63e2bb
2 changed files with 39 additions and 15 deletions
+14 -15
View File
@@ -238,21 +238,20 @@ export function updateNote(db: Db, userId: number, id: string, input: UpdateNote
if (input.title !== undefined) { sharedUpdates.title = input.title; hasSharedUpdates = true; }
if (input.content !== undefined) {
// 3-way merge to preserve concurrent edits from other users
if (input.content !== existing.content) {
const baseSnapshot = input.baseVersion !== undefined
? db.select({ content: noteVersions.content })
.from(noteVersions)
.where(and(eq(noteVersions.noteId, id), lte(noteVersions.version, input.baseVersion)))
.orderBy(desc(noteVersions.version))
.limit(1)
.get()
: db.select({ content: noteVersions.content })
.from(noteVersions)
.where(eq(noteVersions.noteId, id))
.orderBy(desc(noteVersions.version))
.limit(1)
.get();
// 3-way merge to preserve concurrent edits from other users.
// Only attempt merge when there's a concurrent edit: the client's
// baseVersion is behind the current version, meaning someone else
// saved between the client's load and this save.
const hasConcurrentEdit = input.baseVersion !== undefined
&& input.baseVersion < existing.version;
if (hasConcurrentEdit && input.content !== existing.content) {
const baseSnapshot = db.select({ content: noteVersions.content })
.from(noteVersions)
.where(and(eq(noteVersions.noteId, id), lte(noteVersions.version, input.baseVersion!)))
.orderBy(desc(noteVersions.version))
.limit(1)
.get();
if (baseSnapshot && baseSnapshot.content !== existing.content) {
sharedUpdates.content = mergeContent(baseSnapshot.content, input.content, existing.content);
+25
View File
@@ -60,6 +60,31 @@ test.describe('Checklist', () => {
await expect(page.getByTestId('checklist-done-checkbox').first()).toBeChecked();
});
test('Scenario: Sequential check and uncheck both persist correctly', async ({ authenticatedPage: page }) => {
// Given a checklist note with an item "Buy milk" exists
await createChecklistNote(page, 'Tasks2', ['Buy milk']);
// When the user checks the item and closes
await noteCard(page, 'Tasks2').click();
await page.getByTestId('checklist-checkbox').first().click();
await expect(page.getByTestId('checklist-toggle-done')).toContainText('1 done');
await page.getByTestId('close-editor-btn').click();
// Then the checked state persists
await noteCard(page, 'Tasks2').click();
await expect(page.getByTestId('checklist-done-checkbox').first()).toBeChecked();
// When the user unchecks the item from the done section and closes
await page.getByTestId('checklist-done-checkbox').first().click();
await expect(page.getByTestId('checklist-checkbox')).toHaveCount(1);
await page.getByTestId('close-editor-btn').click();
// Then the unchecked state also persists (not reverted by 3-way merge)
await noteCard(page, 'Tasks2').click();
await expect(page.getByTestId('checklist-checkbox')).toHaveCount(1);
await expect(page.getByTestId('checklist-input').first()).toHaveValue('Buy milk');
});
test('Scenario: Enter key adds a new checklist item', async ({ authenticatedPage: page }) => {
// Given a checklist with one item
await page.getByTestId('new-note-btn').click();