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鈥檒l occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add 'evaluating' state to proposal answers #1619

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Jul 19, 2017

Conversation

beagleknight
Copy link
Contributor

馃帺 What? Why?

Added evaluating state when answering a proposal.

馃搶 Related Issues

None

馃搵 Subtasks

  • Add evaluating state to admin
  • Add evaluating state to public pages

馃摲 Screenshots (optional)

image
image
image

馃懟 GIF

None

@beagleknight beagleknight self-assigned this Jul 19, 2017
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jul 19, 2017

Codecov Report

Merging #1619 into master will decrease coverage by 32.7%.
The diff coverage is 0%.

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1619       +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage   96.99%   64.28%   -32.71%     
===========================================
  Files         500       56      -444     
  Lines        8549      994     -7555     
===========================================
- Hits         8292      639     -7653     
- Misses        257      355       +98

1 similar comment
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jul 19, 2017

Codecov Report

Merging #1619 into master will decrease coverage by 32.7%.
The diff coverage is 0%.

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1619       +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage   96.99%   64.28%   -32.71%     
===========================================
  Files         500       56      -444     
  Lines        8549      994     -7555     
===========================================
- Hits         8292      639     -7653     
- Misses        257      355       +98

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jul 19, 2017

Codecov Report

Merging #1619 into master will decrease coverage by 0.03%.
The diff coverage is 83.33%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1619      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   96.99%   96.96%   -0.04%     
==========================================
  Files         500      500              
  Lines        8549     8556       +7     
==========================================
+ Hits         8292     8296       +4     
- Misses        257      260       +3

@@ -17,10 +17,13 @@ module ApplicationHelper
#
# Returns a String.
def humanize_proposal_state(state)
value = if state == "accepted"
value = case state
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This method smells. Can you use i18n defaults?

http://guides.rubyonrails.org/i18n.html#defaults

Something like I18n.t(value, scope: "decidim.proposals.answers", default: :not_answered) should do the trick

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Beautiful

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

You too 鉂わ笍

oriolgual
oriolgual previously approved these changes Jul 19, 2017
@beagleknight beagleknight merged commit c9bb92a into master Jul 19, 2017
@beagleknight beagleknight deleted the feature/proposal-answer-evaluating branch July 19, 2017 10:16
@ghost ghost removed the in-review label Jul 19, 2017
beagleknight added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 20, 2017
* Add proposal answer evaluating state

* Add state evaluating to filters

* Normalize locales

* Add feedback
leio10 pushed a commit to podemos-info/decidim that referenced this pull request Jul 26, 2017
* Add proposal answer evaluating state

* Add state evaluating to filters

* Normalize locales

* Add feedback
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

3 participants