Add JudgeTeam admin method #15696

ajspotts · 2020-12-15T17:23:42Z

Resolves #13993

Description

We already do not allow users via FE code the ability to add/remove admin status for judge teams once they are created (check below screenshot).

However when queried, we want a JudgeTeam to be aware that there is only a single admin for the team, and that admin is the judge lead. In addition, we would like to add BE validation to prevent additional admins being added to JudgeTeams.

Acceptance Criteria

Tests pass

codeclimate · 2020-12-15T17:31:31Z

Code Climate has analyzed commit e81ce5b and detected 0 issues on this pull request.

View more on Code Climate.

ajspotts · 2020-12-15T22:33:28Z

app/models/organizations/judge_team.rb

@@ -56,6 +56,10 @@ def attorneys
    end
  end

+  def admin
+    admins.first
+  end


our new method, simply allowing our code to query JudgeTeams for the team admin

ajspotts · 2020-12-15T22:34:17Z

app/models/organizations_user.rb

+
+  def self.judge_team_has_admin?(organization)
+    organization.is_a?(JudgeTeam) && !!organization.admin
+  end


helper method to check if we are dealing with a JudgeTeam with an admin

app/models/organizations_user.rb

ajspotts · 2020-12-15T22:35:59Z

client/COPY.json

@@ -882,6 +882,7 @@

  "JUDGE_TEAM_REMOVE_JUDGE_ERROR": "Cannot remove a judge from their judge team.",
  "JUDGE_TEAM_ATTORNEY_RIGHTS_ERROR": "Cannot edit attorney rights on non-attorneys",
+  "JUDGE_TEAM_ADMIN_ERROR": "Cannot add more than one admin to a judge team",


new error message for attempting to add an additional admin to JudgeTeam

ajspotts · 2020-12-16T00:51:59Z

spec/models/user_spec.rb

-        allow(JudgeTeam).to receive(:for_judge).with(user).and_return(nil)
-        allow(user).to receive(:judge_in_vacols?).and_return(false)
+        allow(JudgeTeam).to receive(:for_judge).with(judge).and_return(nil)
+        allow(judge).to receive(:judge_in_vacols?).and_return(false)


test previously created a second admin for the JudgeTeam which we no longer allow, updated to check for the single admin

Existing .admins references are either in code that's slated to be modified/deleted separately, or that can match a generic Organization.

…ment-of-veterans-affairs/caseflow into alec/codify-judgeteam-admin-limit

n1zyy · 2020-12-16T23:16:01Z

app/models/organizations/dvc_team.rb

@@ -20,6 +20,8 @@ def dvc
    admins.first
  end

+  alias admin dvc


Not obvious from this, but dvc above this is admins.first which is the same implementation as in JudgeTeam.

This is vaguely out of scope. We'd initially looked at whether DvcTeam and JudgeTeam were sufficiently similar to be descent from a new superclass under Organization, but they don't seem to have a whole lot in common. But we can still make admin a standard between them.

n1zyy · 2020-12-16T23:19:31Z

spec/models/organizations/dvc_team_spec.rb

@@ -16,7 +16,7 @@

        expect(DvcTeam.count).to eq(1)
        expect(DvcTeam.first.dvc).to eq(dvc)
-        expect(DvcTeam.first.admins.first).to eq(dvc)
+        expect(DvcTeam.first.admin).to eq(dvc)


I was torn on whether to change these or not. But moving them to .admin gets us normalized on that being the pattern, and still implicitly tests admins.first since that's the literal implementation of the method.

hschallhorn

We're ensuring other users cannot be made an admin of a judge team with these changes. Can we also ensure that judge adminship cannot be revoked? Below is where we revoke adminship

caseflow/app/models/organizations_user.rb

Lines 23 to 25 in 43562ed

    
           def self.remove_admin_rights_from_user(user, organization) 
        
             existing_record(user, organization)&.update!(admin: false) 
        
           end

Below is how we ensure judges are not removed from their own team

caseflow/app/models/organizations_user.rb

Lines 27 to 33 in 43562ed

    
           def self.remove_user_from_organization(user, organization) 
        
             if organization.is_a?(JudgeTeam) && organization.judge.eql?(user) 
        
               fail Caseflow::Error::ActionForbiddenError, message: COPY::JUDGE_TEAM_REMOVE_JUDGE_ERROR 
        
             end 
        
             existing_record(user, organization).destroy 
        
           end

Also add some tests for the remove_user_from_organization method

…s...

app/models/organizations_user.rb

n1zyy · 2020-12-21T21:50:27Z

app/models/organizations_user.rb

    existing_record(user, organization)&.update!(admin: false)
  end

  def self.remove_user_from_organization(user, organization)
-    if organization.is_a?(JudgeTeam) && organization.judge.eql?(user)
+    # mwagner - Won't this prevent BVA from removing extra judges right now?


⚠️ Putting this here to force the conversation.

#13993 suggests that BVA is going to clean up JudgeTeams with more than one judge. It seems this code will prevent that. 🤔

(My change here is just extracting organization.is_a?(JudgeTeam) && organization.judge.eql?(user) into a new method, not changing behavior.)

#13993 suggests that BVA is going to clean up JudgeTeams with more than one judge. It seems this code will prevent that. 🤔

The board is going to clean these up by removing adminship of non judges on the team. So we

will not be hitting this function (will be using hitting remove_admin_rights_from_user)

will fail the condition of organization.judge.eql?(user) as the users are not the judges of this team

app/models/organizations_user.rb

n1zyy · 2020-12-21T21:52:05Z

spec/models/organizations_user_spec.rb

+    end
+  end
+
+  describe ".remove_user_from_organization" do


I happened to notice this method had no tests, so I added a quick one while I was in there.

💪 hell yes

n1zyy · 2020-12-21T21:54:51Z

app/models/organizations_user.rb

      fail Caseflow::Error::ActionForbiddenError, message: COPY::JUDGE_TEAM_REMOVE_JUDGE_ERROR
    end
-
-    existing_record(user, organization).destroy
+    existing_record(user, organization)&.destroy


I guess this is debatable, actually. I found this while adding a test: if the user doesn't actually belong to the organization, this throws a NoMethodError.

Do we intentionally want the NoMethodError so we can see something went off the rails (pun!), or is implicitly making this a no-op reasonable behavior? (After all: doing nothing gets the user to the expressed end state, of user not being in the organization they weren't in to begin with.)

n1zyy · 2020-12-21T21:56:21Z

client/COPY.json

@@ -883,6 +883,8 @@

  "JUDGE_TEAM_REMOVE_JUDGE_ERROR": "Cannot remove a judge from their judge team.",
  "JUDGE_TEAM_ATTORNEY_RIGHTS_ERROR": "Cannot edit attorney rights on non-attorneys",
+  "JUDGE_TEAM_ADMIN_ERROR": "Cannot add more than one admin to a judge team",
+  "JUDGE_TEAM_DEADMIN_JUDGE_ERROR": "Cannot remove adminship from a judge on their team",


Are you happy with this wording? And is there something better than DEADMIN which kinda reads like "DEAD-MIN"?

n1zyy · 2020-12-21T21:57:19Z

spec/models/organizations_user_spec.rb

+    context "when the user is not part of the organization" do
+      it "it does nothing" do
+        expect { subject }.to_not raise_error
+      end


See the code above—this is a really minimal assertion, but it previously failed.

n1zyy · 2020-12-21T22:15:51Z

app/models/organizations_user.rb

@@ -10,26 +10,32 @@ class OrganizationsUser < CaseflowRecord

  scope :admin, -> { where(admin: true) }

-  # Deprecated: add_user_to_organization(user, organization)
-  # Use instead: organization.add_user(user)


add_user_to_organization does not exist anywhere in our codebase, so this can go.

hschallhorn

Looks good! Nice test additions as well! Ran through the following tests

# To disable any weirdness with old half implemented code
FeatureToggle.disable!(:judge_admin_scm)

judge = User.third
judge_team = JudgeTeam.for_judge(judge)
atty = User.first
OU = OrganizationsUser

# Judge team can only have one admin
OU.make_user_admin(atty, judge_team)
# Caseflow::Error::ActionForbiddenError: Cannot add more than one admin to a judge team

# Judge's cannot have their adminship removed

too early

hschallhorn

Looks good! Nice test additions as well! Ran through the following tests

# To disable any weirdness with old half implemented code
FeatureToggle.disable!(:judge_admin_scm)

judge = User.third
judge_team = JudgeTeam.for_judge(judge)
atty = User.first
OU = OrganizationsUser

# Judge team can only have one admin ✅ 
OU.make_user_admin(atty, judge_team)
# Caseflow::Error::ActionForbiddenError: Cannot add more than one admin to a judge team

# Judges cannot be removed from their own teams ✅ 
Caseflow::Error::ActionForbiddenError: Cannot remove a judge from their judge team.
# Caseflow::Error::ActionForbiddenError: Cannot remove a judge from their judge team.

# Judges cannot have their adminship removed ✅ 
OU.remove_admin_rights_from_user(judge, judge_team)
# Caseflow::Error::ActionForbiddenError: Cannot remove adminship from a judge on their team

* Selectively show cavc decision types and remand subtypes based on feature toggles (#15677) Followup to #15597 ### Description Does not show options for mdr, death dismissal, or straight reversal unless those features are enabled. ### Acceptance Criteria - [x] MDR can only be selected if the feature toggle is on (mdr_cavc_remand) - [x] Death dismissal can only be selected if the feature toggle is on (dismissal_cavc_remand) - [x] Straight reversal can only be selected if the feature toggle is on (reversal_cavc_remand) ### Testing Plan 1. Enable cavc_remand feature toggle(`FeatureToggle.enable!(:cavc_remand)`) 1. Find a dispatched appeal (search for vet 500000000) 1. Click "+ Add CAVC Remand" 1. Confirm mrd, death dismissal, and straight reversal are not available to be selected 1. Enable mdr_cavc_remand feature toggle(`FeatureToggle.enable!(:mdr_cavc_remand)`) 1. Confirm mdr is now selectable 1. Repeat with `dismissal_cavc_remand` and `reversal_cavc_remand` ### User Facing Changes - [x] Screenshots of UI changes added to PR & Original Issue BEFORE|AFTER|mdr_cavc_remand enabled|dismissal_cavc_remand enabled|reversal_cavc_remand enabled ---|---|---|---|--- ![Screen Shot 2020-12-07 at 12 58 24 PM](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/45575454/101387041-ee075680-388b-11eb-9239-61ac3514ab3f.png)|![Screen Shot 2020-12-07 at 12 57 46 PM](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/45575454/101387042-ee075680-388b-11eb-9cea-9b3690daaa6f.png)|![Screen Shot 2020-12-07 at 12 57 39 PM](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/45575454/101387044-ee9fed00-388b-11eb-85f4-a7db71ef47d3.png)|![Screen Shot 2020-12-07 at 12 57 31 PM](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/45575454/101387045-ee9fed00-388b-11eb-934b-c120f551c1c7.png)|![Screen Shot 2020-12-07 at 12 57 27 PM](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/45575454/101387046-ee9fed00-388b-11eb-8fb4-1d1eb12979ce.png) ### Code Documentation Updates - [ ] Add or update code comments at the top of the class, module, and/or component. ### Storybook Story *For Frontend (Presentationa) Components* * [ ] Add a [Storybook](https://github.com/department-of-veterans-affairs/caseflow/wiki/Documenting-React-Components-with-Storybook) file alongside the component file (e.g. create `MyComponent.stories.js` alongside `MyComponent.jsx`) * [ ] Give it a title that reflects the component's location within the overall Caseflow hierarchy * [ ] Write a separate story (within the same file) for each discrete variation of the component ![Screen Shot 2020-12-07 at 1 06 58 PM](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/45575454/101387900-23f90a80-388d-11eb-8157-767303f43fe1.png) * Adds CavcCorrespondenceMailTask (#15692) Resolves #15239 ### Description Creates the CavcCorrespondenceMailTask & its behavior. ### Acceptance Criteria - [ ] work behind the feature toggle: cavc_remand - [ ] Add task should be accessible to the Mail Team - [ ] accessible to the following user groups: Mail Team - [ ] Select Correspondence Type drop down includes CAVC Correspondence - [ ] requires a CAVC Remand appeal with an open CavcTask - [ ] Mail Team users have no actions on the created tasks - [ ] Cavc Lit Admins can act on Organization task or any User task - [ ] Cavc Lit user can act on a user task assigned to themselves - [ ] Verify CavcRemandProcessedLetterResponseWindowTask status does not change. ### Testing Plan 1. Reset the database with `make reset` 2. Create a Cavc Appeal at CavcResponseWindow ```ruby appeal = FactoryBot.create(:appeal, :cavc_response_window_open) appeal.reload.treee appeal.uuid FeatureToggle.disable!(:cavc_remand) ``` 3. Load up [caseflow](http://localhost:3000/test/users) and sign in as Jolly Postman 4. Navigate to the appeal you created 5. Click `+ Add a new task` - [x] CAVC Correspondence is not available 6. Enable the flag: `FeatureToggle.enable!(:cavc_remand)` 7. Reload and Click `+ Add a new task` - [x] CAVC Correspondence is available - [x] Creating a CAVC Correspondence task autoassigns to CAVC Lit Support - [x] No actions are available on the task for the mail user 8. Change to be a CAVC Lit Support admin user 9. Navigate to the appeal - [x] Check the actions exist and do what you want (TK) 10. Create another appeal & mail task 11. Navigate to the appeal and assign it to a Cavc Lit support user - [x] confirm you have admin have actions on the user task 12. Sign in as a Cavc Lit user you didn't assign the task to - [x] No actions are available 13. Sign in as the assigned Cavc Lit user - [x] Check the actions exist and do what you want (TK) Expected Behavior on Actions: - [x] Confirm none of this affects the CavcResponseWindowTask status! - [x] Change Task Type: Cancels the CavcCorrespondence subtree, creates a sibling of the new type - [x] (Re)Assign to person: creates a user task - [x] Place on hold: places a hold - [x] Mark task complete: completes the subtree - [x] Cancel task: cancels the subtree ### Documentation Updates - [x] Add or update code comments at the top of the class, module, and/or component. ### UI Changes ![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/6129479/102548342-840b6000-4088-11eb-99ed-3aa1c1e6968b.png) * Update engineering issue template with impact (#15720) ### Description Adds and "impact" section to engineering task issues so that teams can more easily prioritize tech debt or quickly provide justification to stakeholders for pulling these tickets into sprints. * CAVC extension request action (#15697) * Modal creation speedrun results * Modal cleanup * Add custom on hold duration field * Start js tests for modal * Undo debugging changes * Add cavc rextension request action and modal cancel functionality * Fix tests * Update words * Do not build components we won't actually render * Add error handling to the modal * Add submit request and error handling * Actually create hold for granted extension requests * do not add task action yet * Add tasks to record grant and denials of extension requests * Remove focus * Full grant/deny extension walkthrough changes * Update snapshots and add task action * Fix test * Coverage * Apply suggestions from code review Co-authored-by: Kat Tipton <kat@navapbc.com> * Fix test to check for specific error * Fix copy in snapshots * Add actions to CavcRemandProcessedLetterResponseWindowTask (#15694) * Add actions to CavcRemandProcessedLetterResponseWindowTask * No dupe hearings tasks * Verify schedule hearing uniq only from cavc creation * Allow users with CavcRemandProcessedLetterResponseWindowTasks assigned to them create admin actions and add verify_org_task_uniq tests * Start working on tests * Spacing * Fix tests * Shuffle tests, code climate, fix tests * Fix merge * Add extension feature requests * Apply suggestions from code review Co-authored-by: Yoom Lam <Dung.Lam1@va.gov> * More code review suggestions! Co-authored-by: Yoom Lam <Dung.Lam1@va.gov> * cc Co-authored-by: Kat Tipton <kat@navapbc.com> Co-authored-by: Yoom Lam <Dung.Lam1@va.gov> * CASEFLOW-126 #done Copy AOD state to CAVC Remand Appeal (#15717) * Add JudgeTeam admin method (#15696) Resolves #13993 ### Description We already [do not allow](https://github.com/department-of-veterans-affairs/caseflow/blob/fafdf207a62977510b3e5a2a7ce542885f8f6edc/client/app/queue/OrganizationUsers.jsx#L253) users via FE code the ability to add/remove admin status for judge teams once they are created (check below screenshot). However when queried, we want a JudgeTeam to be aware that there is only a single admin for the team, and that admin is the judge lead. In addition, we would like to add BE validation to prevent additional admins being added to JudgeTeams. ![Screen Shot 2020-12-15 at 10 05 39 AM](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/18618189/102250729-e5d59980-3ed1-11eb-9349-01059a54b33d.png) ### Acceptance Criteria - [ ] Tests pass * create a virtual hearing conference id sequence (#15713) * new sequence for virtual hearing conference ids * service to return virtual hearing conference ids * these updates are unrelated to my change... ...but were neglected when committing a past migration * add IF EXISTS to down * don't use subject to call the tested method * test for sequence cycle * create the sequence if it doesn't exist The sequence is created by a migration, but it isn't recorded in the schema. This means that databases created with db:schema:load won't include the sequence. We call this method before accessing the sequence to make sure it exists. * Create virtual hearing url service (#15714) * git ignore credstash.log * new service for generating virtual hearing links * don't try to assign a value to presence * fail if host & path aren't provided * test for the link service * initialize @conference_id to nil to quiet reek * Add pre-AMA date error validation to Edit NOD Date Modal (#15725) * Parse BGS death date format and coerce to iso8601 (#15730) ### Description When a veteran has a date of death, this data may be returned to the frontend directly from a BGS call, or from the cached value in the Postgres `veterans` table. BGS uses `mm/dd/yyyy`-formatted strings, whereas ActiveRecord provides `Date` objects from Postgres which get automatically serialized in ISO-8601 `yyyy/mm/dd`. This PR ensures that we use ISO-8601 whenever possible (including in the frontend) and parses the date format coming from BGS. ### Acceptance Criteria - [ ] Code compiles correctly ### Testing Plan 1. Go to any case details page with a veteran without a date of death - Normally `appeal = Appeal.last` is fine - Get `appeal.uuid` and point your browser to `/queue/appeals/{UUID}` 2. At `app/models/veteran.rb:130`, append `.tap { |h| h[:date_of_death] = "12/21/2020" }` - This ensures that the data from "BGS" comes with a DoD. 3. Refresh the page and confirm DoD shows properly 4. In Rails console, `appeal.veteran.update!(date_of_death: "2020-12-22")` 5. Refresh the page and confirm DoD shows the changed value properly ### User Facing Changes Before, when attempting to render a date in the wrong format: <img width="668" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/282869/102925854-239e6900-4462-11eb-9c08-14813f1c7a2b.png"> After: <img width="667" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/282869/102925875-2b5e0d80-4462-11eb-835c-0151eb8fc75d.png"> * New edit NOD metadata table (#15705) Resolves #15511 ### Description Model and migration for edit NOD date metadata. Enables storage of NOD date changes. ### Acceptance Criteria - [x] Code compiles correctly ### Database Changes * [x] Timestamps (created_at, updated_at) for new tables * [x] Column comments updated * [x] Have your migration classes inherit from `Caseflow::Migration`, especially when adding indexes (use `add_safe_index`) * [x] Verify that `migrate:rollback` works as desired ([`change` supported functions](https://edgeguides.rubyonrails.org/active_record_migrations.html#using-the-change-method)) * [x] Query profiling performed (eyeball Rails log, check bullet and fasterer output) * [x] Appropriate indexes added (especially for foreign keys, polymorphic columns, unique constraints, and Rails scopes) * [x] DB schema docs updated with `make docs` (after running `make migrate`) * [x] #appeals-schema notified with summary and link to this PR * [x] Any non-obvious semantics or logic useful for interpreting database data is documented at [Caseflow Data Model and Dictionary](https://github.com/department-of-veterans-affairs/caseflow/wiki/Caseflow-Data-Model-and-Dictionary) * CASEFLOW-486 Add judges and attorneys to those that can edit DOD date (#15731) Description * The ability to edit NOD dates was previously restricted to BvaIntake.singleton.users and ClerkOfTheBoard.singletone.users. * Permissions have been expanded to include attorneys and judges. * Displaying the "Edit NOD Date" link in the Queue Timeline section needs to be restricted to attorneys in addition to BvaIntake.singleton.users and ClerkOfTheBoard.singletone.users. Acceptance Criteria * Code compiles correctly * NOD exists and the "Edit NOD Date" link displays for Attorneys, Judges, ClerkOfTheBoard, and BvaIntake users. * NOD exists and the "Edit NOD Date" link does not display for other user types. Testing Plan * Login to Queue as each of the following: COB_User (Clerk of the Board user), BVAOSHOWAL (judge), BVACASPER1 (attorney), BVASHAW (Intake) * Make sure "edit_nod_date" featuretoggle is enabled. * Choose an appeal that has an existing NOD (123456789) and confirm that the link displays. * Switch user to someone without permission (BVAGBLACK) Choose an appeal that has an existing NOD and confirm that the link does not display (123456789) User Facing Changes * See screenshots from [#15672 ](#15672) * No additional changes from this PR * Integrate new virtual hearing link generation (#15732) * create migration to add two new fields to virtual hearing: host_link and guest_link * modify create_conference_job to use new link generation; add new method to linkservice class; add new logic to virtual hearing * ensure delete_conferences_job won't try to delete this type of virtual hearing and virtual hearing checker will not flag this virtual hearing as stuck * inherit from Caseflow::Migration * tests for create_conference_job and virtual_hearing_repository * fix some existing tests * remove unused serialized variable * small styling and codeclimate fixes * changes based on feedback * some further changes based on feedback * add new test link * add schema and a small change * add the new fields to factory * discard job when errors are encountered and fix a method call * add env variables for development * add new tests for test link and status * fix a failing test * some tests for checker * remove focus true * refactor virtual hearing status * syntax fixes based on feedback Co-authored-by: Tomas Apodaca <45415133+tomas-nava@users.noreply.github.com> * Restructured IntakeFrame (#15708) Enabler for #15566 ### Description This restructures `IntakeFrame` to utilize `IntakeLayout`, allowing us to better encapsulate the steps and better handle button behavior. There should be no functional differences between this and `master`. ### Acceptance Criteria - [ ] Code compiles correctly - [ ] Everything in Intake works just as it did previously * check user that updated virtual hearing for featuretoggle (#15734) Co-authored-by: Tomas Apodaca <45415133+tomas-nava@users.noreply.github.com> * Intake | Docket Change | Inputting docket switch information (Grant) (#15729) Connects #15097 ### Description As a BVA Attorney at the Office of the Clerk of the Board, I need a way to enter the necessary information from the Veteran's request to switch dockets, so that I best represent the veteran's request to switch dockets. ### Acceptance Criteria - [x] Please put this work behind the feature toggle: `docket_change` - [x] This feature should be accessible to the following user groups: `ClerkOfTheBoard` - [x] When a user selects "Switch docket" from their action drop-down menu, they should be taken to this screen - [x] Please format the header and instructions as shown in the designs - [x] The user should see a progress bar on the top as shown in the designs (this is the first step) - [x] The user should be able to select a date in the receipt date field (following the existing date selector component) - [x] The user should be able to select "grant all issues" or "grant a partial switch" - [x] "Grant a partial switch" should have the following help text: "e.g. if the Board is only granting a few issues" - [x] There should be 3 docket options (Direct Review, Evidence Submission, Hearing) – please disable the current docket type (for e.g. if the current docket type is Hearing, the user should only be able to select Direct Review or Evidence Submission) - [x] If a user selects "Grant a partial switch", they should be able to see a list of issues and select them (multi-select checkboxes) - [x] All fields are required and once the user has made all their selections, the continue button should become active - [x] Selecting "cancel" will take the user back to the Case Details page - [x] Implement form validation using `react-hook-form` (see prev docket change forms for ref) - [ ] Include screenshot(s) in the Github issue if there are front-end changes - [x] Include Jest tests - [x] Include Storybook story ### User Facing Changes **Empty state** <img width="1668" alt="Screen Shot 2020-12-21 at 9 27 50 PM" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/23080951/102912461-6e60b680-444b-11eb-848f-b28312bd79d5.png"> **Full Switch** <img width="1679" alt="Screen Shot 2020-12-21 at 9 27 11 PM" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/23080951/102912477-76b8f180-444b-11eb-96e5-e29df35a36a9.png"> **Partial Switch** <img width="1672" alt="Screen Shot 2020-12-21 at 9 27 31 PM" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/23080951/102912494-7ddfff80-444b-11eb-8bcd-a8f18703a4a9.png"> ### Storybook Story *For Frontend (Presentationa) Components* * [ ] Add a [Storybook](https://github.com/department-of-veterans-affairs/caseflow/wiki/Documenting-React-Components-with-Storybook) file alongside the component file (e.g. create `MyComponent.stories.js` alongside `MyComponent.jsx`) * [ ] Give it a title that reflects the component's location within the overall Caseflow hierarchy * [ ] Write a separate story (within the same file) for each discrete variation of the component * Non-Veteran Claimants | Adding "Claimant not listed" Option (#15724) Connects #13964 ### Description This adds a "Claimant not listed" radio option to `SelectClaimant` component. This is limited to Appeals, and only if `non_veteran_claimants` feature toggle is enabled. ### Acceptance Criteria - [ ] Code compiles correctly * Add new tables for unrecognized appellants and their POAs (#15710) * Add new tables for unrecognized appellants and their POAs * Fix a few linter complaints * Fix typo in comment * Remove extraneous unrecognized POAs table * Match OtherClaimant behavior to that of other claimants * Rename entity to party * Use FullName utility rather than reinvent the wheel * Tweak database comment * Add factories and specs * Address code climate complaints * Fix feature tests * Use rails association for unrecognized appellant Co-authored-by: Sally Maki <sallymaki@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Hunter Schallhorn <45575454+hschallhorn@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Kat Tipton <kat@navapbc.com> Co-authored-by: Yoom Lam <Dung.Lam1@va.gov> Co-authored-by: Alec Spottswood <ajspottswood@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Tomas Apodaca <45415133+tomas-nava@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Meckila <68879427+meckilabritt-navapbc@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: YANG YANG <yangyang@navapbc.com> Co-authored-by: Brian Gantick <briangantick@navapbc.com> Co-authored-by: pbradin <pbradin@tistatech.com> Co-authored-by: Rubaiyat Rashid <Rubaiyat.Rashid51@myhunter.cuny.edu> Co-authored-by: jcq <2581274+jcq@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Sandra Jones <sjones@tistatech.com> Co-authored-by: Sally Maki <sallymaki@gmail.com>

* Added IntakeLayout; Refactored IntakeFrame to use IntakeLayout; * refactored IntakeProgressBar; * For now, pass along `history` prop to `ReviewButtons` * added history prop to a few more items in IntakeFrame * added AddClaimantForm & stories; * added `ADD_CLAIMANT` to `PAGE_PATHS` constants; added AddClaimantPage & stories; added AddClaimantButtons; moved form schema, etc to intake/addClaimant/utils.js; * updated IntakeFrame & IntakeProgressBar to handle add claimant section * Selectively show cavc decision types and remand subtypes based on feature toggles (#15677) Followup to #15597 ### Description Does not show options for mdr, death dismissal, or straight reversal unless those features are enabled. ### Acceptance Criteria - [x] MDR can only be selected if the feature toggle is on (mdr_cavc_remand) - [x] Death dismissal can only be selected if the feature toggle is on (dismissal_cavc_remand) - [x] Straight reversal can only be selected if the feature toggle is on (reversal_cavc_remand) ### Testing Plan 1. Enable cavc_remand feature toggle(`FeatureToggle.enable!(:cavc_remand)`) 1. Find a dispatched appeal (search for vet 500000000) 1. Click "+ Add CAVC Remand" 1. Confirm mrd, death dismissal, and straight reversal are not available to be selected 1. Enable mdr_cavc_remand feature toggle(`FeatureToggle.enable!(:mdr_cavc_remand)`) 1. Confirm mdr is now selectable 1. Repeat with `dismissal_cavc_remand` and `reversal_cavc_remand` ### User Facing Changes - [x] Screenshots of UI changes added to PR & Original Issue BEFORE|AFTER|mdr_cavc_remand enabled|dismissal_cavc_remand enabled|reversal_cavc_remand enabled ---|---|---|---|--- ![Screen Shot 2020-12-07 at 12 58 24 PM](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/45575454/101387041-ee075680-388b-11eb-9239-61ac3514ab3f.png)|![Screen Shot 2020-12-07 at 12 57 46 PM](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/45575454/101387042-ee075680-388b-11eb-9cea-9b3690daaa6f.png)|![Screen Shot 2020-12-07 at 12 57 39 PM](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/45575454/101387044-ee9fed00-388b-11eb-85f4-a7db71ef47d3.png)|![Screen Shot 2020-12-07 at 12 57 31 PM](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/45575454/101387045-ee9fed00-388b-11eb-934b-c120f551c1c7.png)|![Screen Shot 2020-12-07 at 12 57 27 PM](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/45575454/101387046-ee9fed00-388b-11eb-8fb4-1d1eb12979ce.png) ### Code Documentation Updates - [ ] Add or update code comments at the top of the class, module, and/or component. ### Storybook Story *For Frontend (Presentationa) Components* * [ ] Add a [Storybook](https://github.com/department-of-veterans-affairs/caseflow/wiki/Documenting-React-Components-with-Storybook) file alongside the component file (e.g. create `MyComponent.stories.js` alongside `MyComponent.jsx`) * [ ] Give it a title that reflects the component's location within the overall Caseflow hierarchy * [ ] Write a separate story (within the same file) for each discrete variation of the component ![Screen Shot 2020-12-07 at 1 06 58 PM](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/45575454/101387900-23f90a80-388d-11eb-8157-767303f43fe1.png) * Adds CavcCorrespondenceMailTask (#15692) Resolves #15239 ### Description Creates the CavcCorrespondenceMailTask & its behavior. ### Acceptance Criteria - [ ] work behind the feature toggle: cavc_remand - [ ] Add task should be accessible to the Mail Team - [ ] accessible to the following user groups: Mail Team - [ ] Select Correspondence Type drop down includes CAVC Correspondence - [ ] requires a CAVC Remand appeal with an open CavcTask - [ ] Mail Team users have no actions on the created tasks - [ ] Cavc Lit Admins can act on Organization task or any User task - [ ] Cavc Lit user can act on a user task assigned to themselves - [ ] Verify CavcRemandProcessedLetterResponseWindowTask status does not change. ### Testing Plan 1. Reset the database with `make reset` 2. Create a Cavc Appeal at CavcResponseWindow ```ruby appeal = FactoryBot.create(:appeal, :cavc_response_window_open) appeal.reload.treee appeal.uuid FeatureToggle.disable!(:cavc_remand) ``` 3. Load up [caseflow](http://localhost:3000/test/users) and sign in as Jolly Postman 4. Navigate to the appeal you created 5. Click `+ Add a new task` - [x] CAVC Correspondence is not available 6. Enable the flag: `FeatureToggle.enable!(:cavc_remand)` 7. Reload and Click `+ Add a new task` - [x] CAVC Correspondence is available - [x] Creating a CAVC Correspondence task autoassigns to CAVC Lit Support - [x] No actions are available on the task for the mail user 8. Change to be a CAVC Lit Support admin user 9. Navigate to the appeal - [x] Check the actions exist and do what you want (TK) 10. Create another appeal & mail task 11. Navigate to the appeal and assign it to a Cavc Lit support user - [x] confirm you have admin have actions on the user task 12. Sign in as a Cavc Lit user you didn't assign the task to - [x] No actions are available 13. Sign in as the assigned Cavc Lit user - [x] Check the actions exist and do what you want (TK) Expected Behavior on Actions: - [x] Confirm none of this affects the CavcResponseWindowTask status! - [x] Change Task Type: Cancels the CavcCorrespondence subtree, creates a sibling of the new type - [x] (Re)Assign to person: creates a user task - [x] Place on hold: places a hold - [x] Mark task complete: completes the subtree - [x] Cancel task: cancels the subtree ### Documentation Updates - [x] Add or update code comments at the top of the class, module, and/or component. ### UI Changes ![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/6129479/102548342-840b6000-4088-11eb-99ed-3aa1c1e6968b.png) * added support for `nonVeteranClaimants` feature toggle to intake * updated SelectClaimant to render differently with nonVeteranClaimants feature toggle set; added story for SelectClaimant; * Updated SelectClaimant; * ensure we pass featureToggles in `SelectClaimantConnected` * Update engineering issue template with impact (#15720) ### Description Adds and "impact" section to engineering task issues so that teams can more easily prioritize tech debt or quickly provide justification to stakeholders for pulling these tickets into sprints. * CAVC extension request action (#15697) * Modal creation speedrun results * Modal cleanup * Add custom on hold duration field * Start js tests for modal * Undo debugging changes * Add cavc rextension request action and modal cancel functionality * Fix tests * Update words * Do not build components we won't actually render * Add error handling to the modal * Add submit request and error handling * Actually create hold for granted extension requests * do not add task action yet * Add tasks to record grant and denials of extension requests * Remove focus * Full grant/deny extension walkthrough changes * Update snapshots and add task action * Fix test * Coverage * Apply suggestions from code review Co-authored-by: Kat Tipton <kat@navapbc.com> * Fix test to check for specific error * Fix copy in snapshots * Add actions to CavcRemandProcessedLetterResponseWindowTask (#15694) * Add actions to CavcRemandProcessedLetterResponseWindowTask * No dupe hearings tasks * Verify schedule hearing uniq only from cavc creation * Allow users with CavcRemandProcessedLetterResponseWindowTasks assigned to them create admin actions and add verify_org_task_uniq tests * Start working on tests * Spacing * Fix tests * Shuffle tests, code climate, fix tests * Fix merge * Add extension feature requests * Apply suggestions from code review Co-authored-by: Yoom Lam <Dung.Lam1@va.gov> * More code review suggestions! Co-authored-by: Yoom Lam <Dung.Lam1@va.gov> * cc Co-authored-by: Kat Tipton <kat@navapbc.com> Co-authored-by: Yoom Lam <Dung.Lam1@va.gov> * CASEFLOW-126 #done Copy AOD state to CAVC Remand Appeal (#15717) * Add JudgeTeam admin method (#15696) Resolves #13993 ### Description We already [do not allow](https://github.com/department-of-veterans-affairs/caseflow/blob/fafdf207a62977510b3e5a2a7ce542885f8f6edc/client/app/queue/OrganizationUsers.jsx#L253) users via FE code the ability to add/remove admin status for judge teams once they are created (check below screenshot). However when queried, we want a JudgeTeam to be aware that there is only a single admin for the team, and that admin is the judge lead. In addition, we would like to add BE validation to prevent additional admins being added to JudgeTeams. ![Screen Shot 2020-12-15 at 10 05 39 AM](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/18618189/102250729-e5d59980-3ed1-11eb-9349-01059a54b33d.png) ### Acceptance Criteria - [ ] Tests pass * fuller handling of nonVeteranClaimants feature toggle in SelectClaimant; * added initial feature test for new Add Claimant functionality * added stories for SelectClaimant based on feature toggle * create a virtual hearing conference id sequence (#15713) * new sequence for virtual hearing conference ids * service to return virtual hearing conference ids * these updates are unrelated to my change... ...but were neglected when committing a past migration * add IF EXISTS to down * don't use subject to call the tested method * test for sequence cycle * create the sequence if it doesn't exist The sequence is created by a migration, but it isn't recorded in the schema. This means that databases created with db:schema:load won't include the sequence. We call this method before accessing the sequence to make sure it exists. * Create virtual hearing url service (#15714) * git ignore credstash.log * new service for generating virtual hearing links * don't try to assign a value to presence * fail if host & path aren't provided * test for the link service * initialize @conference_id to nil to quiet reek * Add pre-AMA date error validation to Edit NOD Date Modal (#15725) * Parse BGS death date format and coerce to iso8601 (#15730) ### Description When a veteran has a date of death, this data may be returned to the frontend directly from a BGS call, or from the cached value in the Postgres `veterans` table. BGS uses `mm/dd/yyyy`-formatted strings, whereas ActiveRecord provides `Date` objects from Postgres which get automatically serialized in ISO-8601 `yyyy/mm/dd`. This PR ensures that we use ISO-8601 whenever possible (including in the frontend) and parses the date format coming from BGS. ### Acceptance Criteria - [ ] Code compiles correctly ### Testing Plan 1. Go to any case details page with a veteran without a date of death - Normally `appeal = Appeal.last` is fine - Get `appeal.uuid` and point your browser to `/queue/appeals/{UUID}` 2. At `app/models/veteran.rb:130`, append `.tap { |h| h[:date_of_death] = "12/21/2020" }` - This ensures that the data from "BGS" comes with a DoD. 3. Refresh the page and confirm DoD shows properly 4. In Rails console, `appeal.veteran.update!(date_of_death: "2020-12-22")` 5. Refresh the page and confirm DoD shows the changed value properly ### User Facing Changes Before, when attempting to render a date in the wrong format: <img width="668" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/282869/102925854-239e6900-4462-11eb-9c08-14813f1c7a2b.png"> After: <img width="667" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/282869/102925875-2b5e0d80-4462-11eb-835c-0151eb8fc75d.png"> * New edit NOD metadata table (#15705) Resolves #15511 ### Description Model and migration for edit NOD date metadata. Enables storage of NOD date changes. ### Acceptance Criteria - [x] Code compiles correctly ### Database Changes * [x] Timestamps (created_at, updated_at) for new tables * [x] Column comments updated * [x] Have your migration classes inherit from `Caseflow::Migration`, especially when adding indexes (use `add_safe_index`) * [x] Verify that `migrate:rollback` works as desired ([`change` supported functions](https://edgeguides.rubyonrails.org/active_record_migrations.html#using-the-change-method)) * [x] Query profiling performed (eyeball Rails log, check bullet and fasterer output) * [x] Appropriate indexes added (especially for foreign keys, polymorphic columns, unique constraints, and Rails scopes) * [x] DB schema docs updated with `make docs` (after running `make migrate`) * [x] #appeals-schema notified with summary and link to this PR * [x] Any non-obvious semantics or logic useful for interpreting database data is documented at [Caseflow Data Model and Dictionary](https://github.com/department-of-veterans-affairs/caseflow/wiki/Caseflow-Data-Model-and-Dictionary) * CASEFLOW-486 Add judges and attorneys to those that can edit DOD date (#15731) Description * The ability to edit NOD dates was previously restricted to BvaIntake.singleton.users and ClerkOfTheBoard.singletone.users. * Permissions have been expanded to include attorneys and judges. * Displaying the "Edit NOD Date" link in the Queue Timeline section needs to be restricted to attorneys in addition to BvaIntake.singleton.users and ClerkOfTheBoard.singletone.users. Acceptance Criteria * Code compiles correctly * NOD exists and the "Edit NOD Date" link displays for Attorneys, Judges, ClerkOfTheBoard, and BvaIntake users. * NOD exists and the "Edit NOD Date" link does not display for other user types. Testing Plan * Login to Queue as each of the following: COB_User (Clerk of the Board user), BVAOSHOWAL (judge), BVACASPER1 (attorney), BVASHAW (Intake) * Make sure "edit_nod_date" featuretoggle is enabled. * Choose an appeal that has an existing NOD (123456789) and confirm that the link displays. * Switch user to someone without permission (BVAGBLACK) Choose an appeal that has an existing NOD and confirm that the link does not display (123456789) User Facing Changes * See screenshots from [#15672 ](#15672) * No additional changes from this PR * added featureToggles to connect fns for SelectClaimant for HLRs and SCs * slight tweaks to SelectClaimant * linting * Integrate new virtual hearing link generation (#15732) * create migration to add two new fields to virtual hearing: host_link and guest_link * modify create_conference_job to use new link generation; add new method to linkservice class; add new logic to virtual hearing * ensure delete_conferences_job won't try to delete this type of virtual hearing and virtual hearing checker will not flag this virtual hearing as stuck * inherit from Caseflow::Migration * tests for create_conference_job and virtual_hearing_repository * fix some existing tests * remove unused serialized variable * small styling and codeclimate fixes * changes based on feedback * some further changes based on feedback * add new test link * add schema and a small change * add the new fields to factory * discard job when errors are encountered and fix a method call * add env variables for development * add new tests for test link and status * fix a failing test * some tests for checker * remove focus true * refactor virtual hearing status * syntax fixes based on feedback Co-authored-by: Tomas Apodaca <45415133+tomas-nava@users.noreply.github.com> * initial work on Jest tests for SelectClaimant w/ nonVeteranClaimant (based off code from tests written for death dismissals, where code has yet to be merged; currently those tests are commented out here) * updated CancelButton to allow for additional props to be passed along to Button * Updated AddClaimantButtons; updated AddClaimantPage to support "Back" button as well as cancel; updated AddClaimantPage stories to use MemoryRouter instead of StaticRouter; * updated submit handler for review page to account for adding new claimant * Restructured IntakeFrame (#15708) Enabler for #15566 ### Description This restructures `IntakeFrame` to utilize `IntakeLayout`, allowing us to better encapsulate the steps and better handle button behavior. There should be no functional differences between this and `master`. ### Acceptance Criteria - [ ] Code compiles correctly - [ ] Everything in Intake works just as it did previously * added copy to AddClaimantPage * added `strongLabel` to `relationship` field on AddClaimantForm * added testUtils.js in test/app/intake (sets up barebones providers to allow testing of connected components) * updated AddClaimantForm stories to account for need for form context * added initial Jest test structure for AddClaimantForm and AddClaimantPage * linting * linting * linting * Add navigation to new page to feature test Co-authored-by: Hunter Schallhorn <45575454+hschallhorn@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Kat Tipton <kat@navapbc.com> Co-authored-by: Yoom Lam <Dung.Lam1@va.gov> Co-authored-by: Alec Spottswood <ajspottswood@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Tomas Apodaca <45415133+tomas-nava@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Meckila <68879427+meckilabritt-navapbc@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: YANG YANG <yangyang@navapbc.com> Co-authored-by: Brian Gantick <briangantick@navapbc.com> Co-authored-by: pbradin <pbradin@tistatech.com> Co-authored-by: Rubaiyat Rashid <Rubaiyat.Rashid51@myhunter.cuny.edu> Co-authored-by: Sally Maki <sallymaki@gmail.com>

add JT admin method & tests

9098c29

ajspotts changed the title ~~add JudgeTeam admin method~~ Add JudgeTeam admin method Dec 15, 2020

ajspotts added 2 commits December 15, 2020 15:28

use new admin where previously admins.first

82d298d

prevent more than one admin for JudgeTeams

c3fdaef

ajspotts commented Dec 15, 2020

View reviewed changes

app/models/organizations_user.rb Show resolved Hide resolved

ajspotts commented Dec 15, 2020

View reviewed changes

update test to check for single JudgeTeam admin

18981d0

ajspotts commented Dec 16, 2020

View reviewed changes

n1zyy added 3 commits December 16, 2020 14:54

Merge branch 'master' into alec/codify-judgeteam-admin-limit

c48f26c

Remove references to judgeteam.admins; alias DVCTeam#dvc to admin

7b5b6a5

Existing .admins references are either in code that's slated to be modified/deleted separately, or that can match a generic Organization.

Merge branch 'alec/codify-judgeteam-admin-limit' of github.com:depart…

040448d

…ment-of-veterans-affairs/caseflow into alec/codify-judgeteam-admin-limit

n1zyy reviewed Dec 16, 2020

View reviewed changes

Merge branch 'master' into alec/codify-judgeteam-admin-limit

7ac4c6f

hschallhorn suggested changes Dec 18, 2020

View reviewed changes

lomky changed the base branch from master to develop December 18, 2020 20:17

n1zyy added 2 commits December 21, 2020 15:18

Merge branch 'develop' into alec/codify-judgeteam-admin-limit

c4d198e

Prevent removing a judge from their JudgeTeam

db26ea3

Also add some tests for the remove_user_from_organization method

n1zyy mentioned this pull request Dec 21, 2020

Minor OrganizationsUser cleanup #15723

Closed

n1zyy added 2 commits December 21, 2020 17:13

Whoops, fix some CodeClimate issues

471457b

Remove comment warning about a deprecated method that no longer exist…

20e7ddb

…s...

n1zyy reviewed Dec 21, 2020

View reviewed changes

hschallhorn previously approved these changes Dec 22, 2020

View reviewed changes

hschallhorn approved these changes Dec 22, 2020

View reviewed changes

n1zyy added 2 commits December 22, 2020 14:43

Merge branch 'develop' into alec/codify-judgeteam-admin-limit

6e5f546

Minor tweaks from PR feedback

e81ce5b

n1zyy added the Ready-to-Merge This PR is ready to be merged and will be picked up by va-bot to automatically merge to master label Dec 22, 2020

va-bot merged commit 38c95bc into develop Dec 22, 2020

va-bot deleted the alec/codify-judgeteam-admin-limit branch December 22, 2020 20:05

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Add JudgeTeam admin method #15696

Add JudgeTeam admin method #15696

ajspotts commented Dec 15, 2020 •

edited

Loading

codeclimate bot commented Dec 15, 2020 •

edited

Loading

ajspotts Dec 15, 2020

ajspotts Dec 15, 2020

ajspotts Dec 15, 2020

ajspotts Dec 16, 2020

n1zyy Dec 16, 2020

n1zyy Dec 16, 2020

n1zyy Dec 16, 2020

hschallhorn left a comment

n1zyy Dec 21, 2020

hschallhorn Dec 22, 2020

n1zyy Dec 21, 2020

hschallhorn Dec 22, 2020

n1zyy Dec 21, 2020

n1zyy Dec 21, 2020

n1zyy Dec 21, 2020

n1zyy Dec 21, 2020

hschallhorn left a comment

hschallhorn left a comment

	def self.remove_admin_rights_from_user(user, organization)
	existing_record(user, organization)&.update!(admin: false)
	end

	def self.remove_user_from_organization(user, organization)
	if organization.is_a?(JudgeTeam) && organization.judge.eql?(user)
	fail Caseflow::Error::ActionForbiddenError, message: COPY::JUDGE_TEAM_REMOVE_JUDGE_ERROR
	end

	existing_record(user, organization).destroy
	end

Add JudgeTeam admin method #15696

Add JudgeTeam admin method #15696

Conversation

ajspotts commented Dec 15, 2020 • edited Loading

Description

Acceptance Criteria

codeclimate bot commented Dec 15, 2020 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

hschallhorn left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

hschallhorn left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

hschallhorn left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ajspotts commented Dec 15, 2020 •

edited

Loading

codeclimate bot commented Dec 15, 2020 •

edited

Loading