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

Upgrade jsonattrs to 0.1.26 #2038

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 4, 2018
Merged

Upgrade jsonattrs to 0.1.26 #2038

merged 1 commit into from
Jun 4, 2018

Conversation

oliverroick
Copy link
Member

Proposed changes in this pull request

Why I made this change

If you add or edit a party on the platform and leave non-required fields blank, number and date fields , which are blank, are displayed as None. The bug has been fixed in Cadasta/django-jsonattrs#41, the changes need to be applied to the platform

Description of the change

Upgrade django-jsonattrs to apply the changes of Cadasta/django-jsonattrs#41 to the platform

How someone else can test the change

Create a project using this form. The form contains an integer field called number_children and a date field called dob.

Create a party, choose the party type "Individual" leave both number_children and dob blank. After saving you should check on the party detail page that no value is displayed for both fields.

When should this PR be merged

This is somewhat urgent to one partner so we need to get it through quickly.

Risks

None

Follow-up actions

None

Checklist (for reviewing)

General

Is this PR explained thoroughly? All code changes must be accounted for in the PR description.

  • Review 1
  • Review 2

Is the PR labeled correctly? It should have the migration label if a new migration is added.

  • Review 1
  • Review 2

Is the risk level assessment sufficient? The risks section should contain all risks that might be introduced with the PR and which actions we need to take to mitigate these risks. Possible risks are database migrations, new libraries that need to be installed or changes to deployment scripts.

  • Review 1
  • Review 2

Functionality

Are all requirements met? Compare implemented functionality with the requirements specification.

  • Review 1
  • Review 2

Does the UI work as expected? There should be no Javascript errors in the console; all resources should load. There should be no unexpected errors. Deliberately try to break the feature to find out if there are corner cases that are not handled.

  • Review 1
  • Review 2

Code

Do you fully understand the introduced changes to the code? If not ask for clarification, it might uncover ways to solve a problem in a more elegant and efficient way.

  • Review 1
  • Review 2

Does the PR introduce any inefficient database requests? Use the debug server to check for duplicate requests.

  • Review 1
  • Review 2

Are all necessary strings marked for translation? All strings that are exposed to users via the UI must be marked for translation.

  • Review 1
  • Review 2

Is the code documented sufficiently? Large and complex classes, functions or methods must be annotated with comments following our code-style guidelines.

  • Review 1
  • Review 2

Has the scalability of this change been evaluated?

  • Review 1
  • Review 2

Is there a maintenance plan in place?

  • Review 1
  • Review 2

Tests

Are there sufficient test cases? Ensure that all components are tested individually; models, forms, and serializers should be tested in isolation even if a test for a view covers these components.

  • Review 1
  • Review 2

If this is a bug fix, are tests for the issue in place? There must be a test case for the bug to ensure the issue won’t regress. Make sure that the tests break without the new code to fix the issue.

  • Review 1
  • Review 2

If this is a new feature or a significant change to an existing feature? has the manual testing spreadsheet been updated with instructions for manual testing?

  • Review 1
  • Review 2

Security

Confirm this PR doesn't commit any keys, passwords, tokens, usernames, or other secrets.

  • Review 1
  • Review 2

Are all UI and API inputs run through forms or serializers?

  • Review 1
  • Review 2

Are all external inputs validated and sanitized appropriately?

  • Review 1
  • Review 2

Does all branching logic have a default case?

  • Review 1
  • Review 2

Does this solution handle outliers and edge cases gracefully?

  • Review 1
  • Review 2

Are all external communications secured and restricted to SSL?

  • Review 1
  • Review 2

Documentation

Are changes to the UI documented in the platform docs? If this PR introduces new platform site functionality or changes existing ones, the changes must be documented in the Cadasta Platform Documentation.

  • Review 1
  • Review 2

Are changes to the API documented in the API docs? If this PR introduces new API functionality or changes existing ones, the changes must be documented in the API docs.

  • Review 1
  • Review 2

Are reusable components documented? If this PR introduces components that are relevant to other developers (for instance a mixin for a view or a generic form) they should be documented in the Wiki.

  • Review 1
  • Review 2

@oliverroick oliverroick merged commit d4d651f into master Jun 4, 2018
@oliverroick oliverroick deleted the upgrade-jsonattrs branch June 4, 2018 17:00
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants