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

An assembly member can be an existing user #3302

Merged
merged 1 commit into from May 11, 2018

Conversation

@rbngzlv
Copy link
Contributor

@rbngzlv rbngzlv commented Apr 27, 2018

馃帺 What? Why?

This PR sits on #3008 and #3301 and add the possibility to link an assembly member to an existing user in the platform.

I'm pointing this PR to the feature/assembly_members branch so you can review it faster, once merged, I'll point this to the master branch.

馃搶 Related Issues

馃搵 Subtasks

  • Add CHANGELOG entry
@ghost ghost assigned rbngzlv Apr 27, 2018
@ghost ghost added the status: WIP label Apr 27, 2018
@rbngzlv rbngzlv added this to the Release v.0.11.0 milestone Apr 27, 2018
@@ -18,11 +18,26 @@ class AssemblyMemberForm < Form
attribute :designation_mode, String
attribute :position, String
attribute :position_other, String
attribute :user_id, Integer
attribute :existing_user, Boolean, default: false
attribute :user_id, Integer

This comment has been minimized.

@oriolgual

oriolgual Apr 27, 2018
Member

This is duplicated


query = current_organization.users&.order(name: :asc)
term = params[:term]
if term&.start_with?("@")

This comment has been minimized.

@oriolgual

oriolgual Apr 27, 2018
Member

I've seen this code in other PRs, should we extract this to a class or something?

This comment has been minimized.

@rbngzlv

rbngzlv Apr 27, 2018
Author Contributor

Yo've seen it in the same module? If not, we need to extract it to the core module so we don't add a dependency to the admin, right? We can extract it to a query class?

This comment has been minimized.

@isaacmg410

isaacmg410 May 3, 2018
Contributor

@oriolgual, you refer to this other PR that we are "arguing" there. #3136 (comment)

We can look for a solution for both systems. What do you recommend?
Create a OrganizersController or UsersController but should be done in Decidim::Core no?

This comment has been minimized.

@oriolgual

oriolgual May 3, 2018
Member

Yes, should be done at core, no problem. I'd go with a OrganizersController

This comment has been minimized.

@isaacmg410

isaacmg410 May 3, 2018
Contributor

good! But in this case, will be UsersController ?

This comment has been minimized.

@oriolgual

oriolgual May 3, 2018
Member

Oh, yes you're right

@rbngzlv rbngzlv mentioned this pull request May 10, 2018
1 of 1 task complete
@rbngzlv rbngzlv force-pushed the feature/assembly_members_belongs_to_user branch from 955f457 to 8750a8b May 10, 2018
@rbngzlv rbngzlv changed the base branch from feature/assembly_members to feature/move_organizer_picker_to_autocomplete_field May 10, 2018
@rbngzlv rbngzlv force-pushed the feature/assembly_members_belongs_to_user branch from 8750a8b to 714dd92 May 10, 2018
@rbngzlv rbngzlv added in-review and removed status: WIP labels May 10, 2018
@rbngzlv rbngzlv force-pushed the feature/move_organizer_picker_to_autocomplete_field branch from 30c0900 to c228ab0 May 11, 2018
@rbngzlv rbngzlv changed the base branch from feature/move_organizer_picker_to_autocomplete_field to master May 11, 2018
@rbngzlv rbngzlv force-pushed the feature/assembly_members_belongs_to_user branch from 714dd92 to 31d1f22 May 11, 2018
@ghost ghost added the status: WIP label May 11, 2018
@rbngzlv rbngzlv removed the status: WIP label May 11, 2018
@rbngzlv
Copy link
Contributor Author

@rbngzlv rbngzlv commented May 11, 2018

@decidim/lot-core review it please, rebased on master after merging #3387.

@mrcasals mrcasals merged commit 5e2e7a5 into master May 11, 2018
27 checks passed
27 checks passed
ci/circleci: accountability Your tests passed on CircleCI!
Details
ci/circleci: admin Your tests passed on CircleCI!
Details
ci/circleci: api Your tests passed on CircleCI!
Details
ci/circleci: assemblies Your tests passed on CircleCI!
Details
ci/circleci: blogs Your tests passed on CircleCI!
Details
ci/circleci: budgets Your tests passed on CircleCI!
Details
ci/circleci: build_design_app Your tests passed on CircleCI!
Details
ci/circleci: build_test_app Your tests passed on CircleCI!
Details
ci/circleci: comments Your tests passed on CircleCI!
Details
ci/circleci: consultations Your tests passed on CircleCI!
Details
ci/circleci: core Your tests passed on CircleCI!
Details
ci/circleci: debates Your tests passed on CircleCI!
Details
ci/circleci: generators Your tests passed on CircleCI!
Details
ci/circleci: initiatives Your tests passed on CircleCI!
Details
ci/circleci: main Your tests passed on CircleCI!
Details
ci/circleci: meetings Your tests passed on CircleCI!
Details
ci/circleci: pages Your tests passed on CircleCI!
Details
ci/circleci: participatory_processes Your tests passed on CircleCI!
Details
ci/circleci: proposals Your tests passed on CircleCI!
Details
ci/circleci: sortitions Your tests passed on CircleCI!
Details
ci/circleci: surveys Your tests passed on CircleCI!
Details
ci/circleci: system Your tests passed on CircleCI!
Details
ci/circleci: upload-coverage Your tests passed on CircleCI!
Details
ci/circleci: verifications Your tests passed on CircleCI!
Details
codeclimate All good!
Details
codeclimate/diff-coverage 100% (80% threshold)
Details
codeclimate/total-coverage 98% (0.0% change)
Details
@mrcasals mrcasals deleted the feature/assembly_members_belongs_to_user branch May 11, 2018
isaacmg410 pushed a commit to CodiTramuntana/decidim that referenced this pull request May 25, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Linked issues

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants