Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

fix -- handle uncategorized owners #2268

Merged
merged 11 commits into from
Oct 23, 2024
Merged

fix -- handle uncategorized owners #2268

merged 11 commits into from
Oct 23, 2024

Conversation

B-T-D
Copy link
Contributor

@B-T-D B-T-D commented Oct 3, 2024

Description

Prior PR didn't handle the case of having owner categories configured, but also having some owners without any categories.

Motivation and Context

How Has This Been Tested?

Added unit tests for key cases, tested in our staging environment.

CheckList

  • PR title addresses the issue accurately and concisely
  • Updates Documentation and Docstrings
  • Adds tests
  • Adds instrumentation (logs, or UI events)

@boring-cyborg boring-cyborg bot added the area:frontend From the Frontend folder label Oct 3, 2024
@B-T-D B-T-D changed the title test for staging deploy fix -- handle uncategorized owners Oct 3, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

@kristenarmes kristenarmes left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

ideally this should have a couple unit tests to help avoid issues around this feature in the future, might be worth it to write a couple quick ones

Comment on lines 253 to 256
// if any owners uncategorized, set section to null to render an uncategorized owners list
Object.keys(itemProps).forEach((key) => {
if (!itemProps[key].additionalOwnerInfo?.owner_category) {
section = null;
}
});
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

is this needed if you do the other check before this function is called? this feels like it might be more complicated than it needs to be

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah it wasn't needed both places, I deleted it from here.

Signed-off-by: Ben Dye <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Ben Dye <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Ben Dye <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Ben Dye <[email protected]>
@B-T-D B-T-D force-pushed the btd-owners-ui-null-check-fe branch from f5b4dc3 to ddd1137 Compare October 21, 2024 17:04
Signed-off-by: Ben Dye <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Ben Dye <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Ben Dye <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Ben Dye <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Ben Dye <[email protected]>
@B-T-D B-T-D merged commit 088d30d into main Oct 23, 2024
11 checks passed
@B-T-D B-T-D deleted the btd-owners-ui-null-check-fe branch October 23, 2024 21:41
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area:frontend From the Frontend folder
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants