Error on non ng-repeated lists: getSource is not a function (ng-sortable)

[Reklino]

When not using ng-repeat to create sortable objects, I am getting this error:

getSource is not a function (ng-sorgable.js:79)

Is there any way around using ng-repeat? In this case, I have individual elements spread across an application that I want to be draggable, but not sortable. I want to be able to drag them over a list that IS using ng-repeat and IS sortable. I've tried to set this up in this codepen here

[RubaXa]

Try-dev branch: http://codepen.io/anon/pen/ZbpRbo

[Reklino]

Ahhhh. That was the line of code I was looking for. Awesome :)

[Reklino]

Hm...

Is there a way to assign a model to the individual standalone objects?

Currently when I attempt to drag and drop from a non-repeated list to a repeated one, I get an error message. See this pen. This makes sense because there is no model/object associated with the item being dragged I guess. It would be great if there was a way to assign an object to a static non-repeated sortable item. Maybe something like:

<ul ng-sortable>
  <li ng-sortable-model="m.foo"></li>
  <li ng-sortable-model="m.bar"></li>
  ...
</ul>

Note: If you'd rather me open this in a separate issue, just let me know. I figured I'd place it here since it's relevant.

[RubaXa]

Uh, it's a strange task.
Why statics can not be an array?

[Reklino]

Haha.

It is a strange task... but it's necessary for a project I'm working on that has widgets loaded into different tabs. It doesn't make sense to put them inside an ng-repeat at all unfortunately. I need to be able to drag the static widgets into a sortable list (for a dashboard application).

[Reklino]

I can make it work similar to how I need if I do something like this. But it's kind of a workaround...

[RubaXa]

Understand that this is your problem, more precisely of your implementation, you nothing prevents to change your code on ng-repeat.

[Reklino]

Understood. Thanks!

[RubaXa]

I can make it work similar to how I need if I do something like this. But it's kind of a workaround...

Yes, this is what I meant 👍