Decide where the work belongs
Identify the unapproved difference
Compare the reviewed and executed file, mapping, and options for controlled examples. Record whether the difference changes accepted values, target fields, or only display. Give silent changes special attention where the resulting data looks valid and ordinary validation cannot reveal that the user approved a different mapping.
Scope the triggering editing path
Group examples by file replacement, back navigation, concurrent edits, or delayed execution. Compare a simple uninterrupted import as a control. Estimate reach from those specific workflow paths rather than treating all imports as affected when the mismatch requires a particular sequence or mutable setting to occur.
Assess containment and reconciliation
Determine whether the current confirmation shows the exact inputs execution will use and whether a changed preview requires another review. Estimate how users can identify and reconcile already affected records. A recommendation to avoid editing settings may reduce exposure temporarily but is not proof the approved inputs remain bound to execution.
What to carry forward
Record priority with the unapproved change, triggering sequence, observed harm, and recovery effort. Assign a revisit trigger for another mutable input or silent mapping change. Keep the queue decision focused on preserving the user’s reviewed choice rather than adding confirmation steps that still execute a different revision.
Technical background: Django import-export documentation.
Keep the decision with the work.
Use a Work Item in Aglet to record the problem, the evidence you have, and the next decision. Add an owner and priority, then keep updates in the discussion so the next person can follow the reasoning.
Create an account See the product workflow