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
RSpec to replicate duplicate JudgeAssignTasks problem #16382
Conversation
Generated by 🚫 Danger |
Code Climate has analyzed commit 3d5612b and detected 0 issues on this pull request. View more on Code Climate. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This seems like a helpful test for showing current behavior (which allows multiple active JudgeAssignTasks
, but shouldn't); this should help with verifying that #16072 works as intended.
@eileen-nava Note the |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@eileen-nava Note the
explain
page was loaded before any modifications were made to the appeal to show the imported appeal. If you reload theexplain
page in your browser, it shows the most recent task tree. Or you canappeal.reload.treee
in the pry prompt.
Got it, thanks! 👍
"middle_name": "P", | ||
"name_suffix": null, | ||
"closest_regional_office": null, | ||
"ssn": "000765067", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
In keeping with "Check that json file contains no PII," I want to confirm that none of the ssn
s in this file are actual social security numbers. (I don't think they are but, I am double-checking in the spirit of due diligence.)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
See https://secure.ssa.gov/poms.nsf/lnx/0110201035 for reference.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Got it, thanks. 👍
Functions.grant!("System Admin", users: ["PETERSBVAM"]) # enable access to `export` endpoint | ||
end | ||
|
||
# Ticket: https://github.com/department-of-veterans-affairs/dsva-vacols/issues/174 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is it standard to link to tickets in comments? Part of me wonders if this could bloat the codebase over time.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Not sure what you mean by bloat. The URL should always work. I like to include links to cross-references. In this case, the ticket provide more context in understanding the purpose of the RSpec and there may be updates to that ticket that aren't captured in this RSpec.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Okay, fine by me.
Bumps https://github.com/department-of-veterans-affairs/dsva-vacols/issues/174
Description
Add RSpec to replicate duplicate JudgeAssignTasks problem.
PR #16072 should address the problem.
Acceptance Criteria
Testing Plan
Uncomment
binding.pry
in the RSpec and examine the browser tabs and task tree.Check that json file contains no PII.