Skip to content

Request groups page #1196

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

Merged
merged 12 commits into from
Aug 10, 2016
Merged

Request groups page #1196

merged 12 commits into from
Aug 10, 2016

Conversation

kwm4385
Copy link
Contributor

@kwm4385 kwm4385 commented Aug 9, 2016

Creates a new Group page (/group/:groupId) which shows details for all requests contained in it.
Also adds a breadcrumb item for requests, deploys, and tasks which are part of a group.
The metadata button displays a modal with copyable infoboxes. (button only is only shown if the group has metadata)

image

screen shot 2016-08-09 at 11 51 18 am

@tpetr @wolfd @Calvinp

import { buildApiAction } from './base';

export const FetchGroups = buildApiAction(
'FETCH_GROUPS',
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

i'd suggest being explicit with the naming (FetchRequestGroups, FETCH_REQUEST_GROUPS), we also have the concept of groups for authentication (which may be featured more prominently in the future)

@@ -36,6 +37,7 @@ const AppRouter = (props) => {
<Route path="requests/new" component={RequestForm} />
<Route path="requests/edit/:requestId" component={RequestForm} />
<Route path="requests(/:state)(/:subFilter)(/:searchFilter)" component={RequestsPage} />
<Route path="group/:groupId" component={Group} store={props.store} />
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

i dont think the store field is necessary

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yep you're right, leftover from an earlier experiment.

@@ -353,6 +362,7 @@ function mapStateToProps(state, ownProps) {
deploy: state.api.deploy.data,
taskHistory: state.api.taskHistoryForDeploy.data,
isTaskHistoryFetching: state.api.taskHistoryForDeploy.isFetching,
group: state.api.deploy.data.deploy && _.first(_.filter(state.api.requestGroups.data, (g) => _.contains(g.requestIds, state.api.deploy.data.deploy.requestId))),
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm adding a linting check to prohibit one-letter variable names (See #1192). Might want to change g to groupToCheck, or something more descriptive.

@Calvinp
Copy link
Contributor

Calvinp commented Aug 9, 2016

LGTM

@tpetr tpetr merged commit 8ee3b69 into decaf Aug 10, 2016
@tpetr tpetr modified the milestone: 0.10.0 Aug 18, 2016
@ssalinas ssalinas deleted the request-groups branch November 1, 2016 13:24
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