Skip to content

[OSDEV-1365] Disable claim button when moderation event on new productino location is REJECTED#497

Merged
VadimKovalenkoSNF merged 1 commit intomainfrom
OSDEV-1365-quickfix-v2
Feb 3, 2025
Merged

[OSDEV-1365] Disable claim button when moderation event on new productino location is REJECTED#497
VadimKovalenkoSNF merged 1 commit intomainfrom
OSDEV-1365-quickfix-v2

Conversation

@VadimKovalenkoSNF
Copy link
Contributor

@VadimKovalenkoSNF VadimKovalenkoSNF commented Feb 3, 2025

Follow-up fix for OSDEV-1365
Disable claim button when moderation event on new productino location is REJECTED.

@VadimKovalenkoSNF VadimKovalenkoSNF self-assigned this Feb 3, 2025
@sonarqubecloud
Copy link

sonarqubecloud bot commented Feb 3, 2025

@coderabbitai
Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Feb 3, 2025

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The tests for the "Continue to Claim" button in the ProductionLocationDialog have been restructured to use parameterized tests covering various combinations of moderation and claim statuses. Changes also include updating the component’s tooltip text to return "Claim is not available." by default and altering the default prop for claimStatus from an enum value to null. Additionally, the constant used for claim statuses has been removed and the fallback logic updated accordingly without impacting the public API.

Changes

File(s) Change Summary
src/react/src/__tests__/components/ProductionLocationDialog.test.js Refactored tests: replaced individual checks with a parameterized test.each() approach to validate the button's enabled/disabled state under different moderation and claim statuses; removed redundant tests.
src/react/src/components/Contribute/ProductionLocationDialog.jsx, src/react/src/components/Contribute/ProductionLocationInfo.jsx Updated claim status handling: changed getTooltipText default output from an empty string to "Claim is not available." and revised the default claimStatus from UNCLAIMED to null; removed the PRODUCTION_LOCATION_CLAIM_STATUSES_ENUM constant dependency.

Suggested reviewers

  • vladsha-dev
  • roman-stolar
  • mazursasha1990
  • Innavin369
✨ Finishing Touches
  • 📝 Generate Docstrings (Beta)

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR. (Beta)
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 1

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between cd8ee37 and 63e9941.

📒 Files selected for processing (3)
  • src/react/src/__tests__/components/ProductionLocationDialog.test.js (1 hunks)
  • src/react/src/components/Contribute/ProductionLocationDialog.jsx (2 hunks)
  • src/react/src/components/Contribute/ProductionLocationInfo.jsx (1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Learnings (1)
src/react/src/__tests__/components/ProductionLocationDialog.test.js (4)
Learnt from: VadimKovalenkoSNF
PR: opensupplyhub/open-supply-hub#470
File: src/react/src/__tests__/components/ProductionLocationDialog.test.js:122-122
Timestamp: 2025-01-27T07:58:22.674Z
Learning: When testing button states in components wrapped with DialogTooltip/Tooltip, use getComputedStyle().pointerEvents checks instead of direct button attribute assertions, as the wrapping prevents direct access to the button's attributes.
Learnt from: VadimKovalenkoSNF
PR: opensupplyhub/open-supply-hub#470
File: src/react/src/__tests__/components/ProductionLocationDialog.test.js:0-0
Timestamp: 2025-01-27T07:20:43.334Z
Learning: In the Open Supply Hub project, buttons wrapped by the `DialogTooltip` component control their disabled state through CSS pointer-events rather than the HTML disabled attribute, requiring tests to check `getComputedStyle().pointerEvents` instead of using `toBeDisabled()`.
Learnt from: VadimKovalenkoSNF
PR: opensupplyhub/open-supply-hub#470
File: src/react/src/__tests__/components/ProductionLocationDialog.test.js:66-105
Timestamp: 2025-01-27T07:57:17.370Z
Learning: The ProductionLocationDialog component does not receive error props directly, as errors are not passed down explicitly to this component.
Learnt from: VadimKovalenkoSNF
PR: opensupplyhub/open-supply-hub#470
File: src/react/src/__tests__/components/ProductionLocationDialog.test.js:66-105
Timestamp: 2025-01-27T07:57:17.370Z
Learning: In the Open Supply Hub project, accessibility testing is performed manually rather than through automated tests.
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (13)
  • GitHub Check: run-integration-test-code-quality
  • GitHub Check: run-flake8-linter
  • GitHub Check: run-fe-code-quality
  • GitHub Check: run-eslint-linter-and-prettier-formatter
  • GitHub Check: run-django-code-quality
  • GitHub Check: run-dd-code-quality
  • GitHub Check: run-countries-code-quality
  • GitHub Check: run-contricleaner-code-quality
  • GitHub Check: get-base-branch-fe-cov
  • GitHub Check: get-base-branch-countries-cov
  • GitHub Check: get-base-branch-django-cov
  • GitHub Check: get-base-branch-dd-cov
  • GitHub Check: get-base-branch-contricleaner-cov
🔇 Additional comments (4)
src/react/src/__tests__/components/ProductionLocationDialog.test.js (1)

132-147: LGTM!

The test correctly verifies that the claim button links to the appropriate URL when enabled.

src/react/src/components/Contribute/ProductionLocationDialog.jsx (2)

74-84: LGTM!

The default tooltip text change improves user feedback by explicitly stating that the claim is not available.


311-314: LGTM!

Changing the default value of claimStatus to null is more accurate as it represents the absence of a claim status rather than assuming an unclaimed state.

src/react/src/components/Contribute/ProductionLocationInfo.jsx (1)

796-796: LGTM!

Using null as the fallback value for claimStatus is consistent with the component's new default prop value.

@barecheck
Copy link

barecheck bot commented Feb 3, 2025

React App | Jest test suite - Code coverage report

Total: 28.88%

Your code coverage diff: 0.05% ▴

✅ All code changes are covered

@barecheck
Copy link

barecheck bot commented Feb 3, 2025

Dedupe Hub App | Unittest test suite - Code coverage report

Total: 56.14%

Your code coverage diff: 0.00% ▴

✅ All code changes are covered

@barecheck
Copy link

barecheck bot commented Feb 3, 2025

Contricleaner App | Unittest test suite - Code coverage report

Total: 98.91%

Your code coverage diff: 0.00% ▴

✅ All code changes are covered

@barecheck
Copy link

barecheck bot commented Feb 3, 2025

Countries App | Unittest test suite - Code coverage report

Total: 100%

Your code coverage diff: 0.00% ▴

✅ All code changes are covered

@barecheck
Copy link

barecheck bot commented Feb 3, 2025

Django App | Unittest test suite - Code coverage report

Total: 80.4%

Your code coverage diff: 0.00% ▴

✅ All code changes are covered

Copy link
Contributor

@mazursasha1990 mazursasha1990 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

Copy link
Contributor

@roman-stolar roman-stolar left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@VadimKovalenkoSNF VadimKovalenkoSNF merged commit 62ae85f into main Feb 3, 2025
21 checks passed
@VadimKovalenkoSNF VadimKovalenkoSNF deleted the OSDEV-1365-quickfix-v2 branch February 3, 2025 09:17
protsack-stephan pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 12, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants