Data Validation on pre-submit not executing with right click Check In and Submit Content

Development Pipeline & Plugins
, ,
1

Hi!

We are using data validators inheriting from EditorValidatorBase to validate assets pre-submit however there are some cases where it is not triggering on submission. Most notably, it is not triggering when the user right clicks asset in Content browser > Revision Control > Check In. This also happens when running Revision Control > Submit Content. It does trigger when submitting from the Revision Control > View Changes UI.

I found some previous threads that flagged this issue:

  • [Support for pre-commit validation on single asset [Content removed]
  • [Data Validation not hooked into some [Content removed]

I was wondering if this is still being looked at being officially supported?

2

Steps to Reproduce

  1. Create a data validator Editor Utility Blueprint inheriting from EditorValidatorBase
  2. Override the CanValidate function and add a Switch on EDataValidationUsecase node which triggers on Pre Submit and Manual
  3. Create simple validation logic such as checking static mesh asset naming in the CanValidateAsset and ValidateLoadedAsset override functions
  4. Attempt to submit an asset that should fail by right clicking asset in Content Browser > Revision Control > Check In.

This will submit even though it should fail the validation. This also happens when running Revision Control > Submit Content.

3

Hi Darian,

Thanks for reaching out. From what I can see, we are still planning to support this feature in a future release but there have not been any updates since the previous threads you have linked. Since this involves systems owned by a few teams, I have reached out to them to see what the current status is and I will let you know if I get any new information.

The second thread you linked has a suggestion on how this could be implemented if you are comfortable with modifying engine code.

Let me know if you have any other questions that I can help with!

Thanks,

Aditya Ravi Chandran

4

Thank you for checking. We were able to implement a version of this in the engine from the information provided in those threads.

It would be great to hear if you get any new information about any official support for this!

5

Glad to hear you were able to implement a workaround.

Unfortunately I have not heard back from the team with any new information about this but we are still planning to support it sometime in the future.

Thanks,

Aditya Ravi Chandran