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

Feature/3799 two tiered api #2352

Open
wants to merge 26 commits into
base: develop
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Conversation

philipkcl
Copy link
Contributor

@philipkcl philipkcl commented Feb 14, 2024

Introduce a two-tiered API

Please don't delete any sections when completing this PR template; instead enter N/A for checkboxes or sections which are not applicable, unless otherwise stated below

See #

Describe the scope/purpose of the PR here in as much detail as you like

Categorisation

This PR...

  • has scripts to run
  • has migrations to run
  • adds new infrastructure
  • changes the CI pipeline
  • affects the public site
  • affects the editorial area
  • affects the publisher area
  • affects the monitoring

Basic PR Checklist

Instructions for developers:

  • For each checklist item, if it is N/A to your PR check the N/A box
  • For each item that you have done and confirmed for yourself, check Developer box (including if you have checked the N/A box)

Instructions for reviewers:

  • For each checklist item that has been confirmed by the Developer, check the Reviewer box if you agree
  • For multiple reviewers, feel free to add your own checkbox with your github username next to it if that helps with review tracking

Code Style

  • No deprecated methods are used

    • N/A
    • Developer
    • Reviewer
  • No magic strings/numbers - all strings are in constants or messages files

    • N/A
    • Developer
    • Reviewer
  • ES queries are wrapped in a Query object rather than inlined in the code

    • N/A
    • Developer
    • Reviewer
  • Where possible our common library functions have been used (e.g. dates manipulated via dates)

    • N/A
    • Developer
    • Reviewer
  • Cleaned up commented out code, etc

    • N/A
    • Developer
    • Reviewer
  • Urls are constructed with url_for not hard-coded

    • N/A
    • Developer
    • Reviewer

Testing

  • Unit tests have been added/modified

    • N/A
    • Developer
    • Reviewer
  • Functional tests have been added/modified

    • N/A
    • Developer
    • Reviewer
  • Code has been run manually in development, and functional tests followed locally

    • N/A
    • Developer
    • Reviewer
  • Have CSS/style changes been implemented? If they are of a global scope (e.g. on base HTML elements) have the downstream impacts of the change in other areas of the system been considered?

    • N/A
    • Developer
    • Reviewer

Documentation

Release Readiness

Testing

List the Functional Tests that must be run to confirm this feature

  1. ...
  2. ...

Deployment

What deployment considerations are there? (delete any sections you don't need)

Configuration changes

What configuration changes are included in this PR, and do we need to set specific values for production

Scripts

What scripts need to be run from the PR (e.g. if this is a report generating feature), and when (once, regularly, etc).

Migrations

What migrations need to be run to deploy this

Monitoring

What additional monitoring is required of the application as a result of this feature

New Infrastructure

What new infrastructure does this PR require (e.g. new services that need to run on the back-end).

Continuous Integration

What CI changes are required for this

@Steven-Eardley Steven-Eardley added the CONFLICT WITH BASE Merge base branch (usually develop or master) in to resolve label Mar 26, 2024
@philipkcl philipkcl removed the CONFLICT WITH BASE Merge base branch (usually develop or master) in to resolve label Apr 16, 2024
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.

None yet

2 participants