Skip to content

ENG-2907: Add Source filter to Request Manager#8161

Merged
nreyes-dev merged 7 commits into
mainfrom
nreyes/eng-2907
May 15, 2026
Merged

ENG-2907: Add Source filter to Request Manager#8161
nreyes-dev merged 7 commits into
mainfrom
nreyes/eng-2907

Conversation

@nreyes-dev
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@nreyes-dev nreyes-dev commented May 12, 2026

Ticket ENG-2907

Description Of Changes

Adds a Source multi-select filter to the Request Manager dashboard, exposing all PrivacyRequestSource enum values (Privacy Center, Request Manager, Consent Webhook, Fides.js, Dataset Test, Janus SDK). DSRs with a NULL source remain visible when no filter is applied.

The existing default exclusion guards for consent_webhook (toggle-gated) and dataset_test (always-on) are bypassed when an explicit source filter is set, so a user who selects those values in the dropdown gets them in the results instead of an empty list.

image

Code Changes

  • Added source field and a single-to-list validator to PrivacyRequestFilter schema.
  • Added source clause to filter_privacy_request_queryset; gated the consent_webhook and dataset_test exclusion guards on not filters.source so explicit filters win.
  • Exposed source as a repeatable query param on the deprecated GET /privacy-request endpoint.
  • Added SubjectRequestSourceMap / SubjectRequestSourceOptions constants and a Source multi-select to PrivacyRequestFiltersBar.
  • Added source to FilterQueryParams, the nuqs URL state, and memoized params in usePrivacyRequestsFilters.
  • Added source to the generated PrivacyRequestFilter TS type and updated PrivacyRequestFiltersBar test fixtures.
  • Added schema tests for the source validator and endpoint tests covering single-source filtering, multi-source OR, null-source inclusion when unfiltered, and the consent_webhook / dataset_test override behaviors.

Pre-Merge Checklist

  • Issue requirements met
  • All CI pipelines succeeded
  • CHANGELOG.md updated
    • Add a db-migration This indicates that a change includes a database migration label to the entry if your change includes a DB migration
    • Add a high-risk This issue suggests changes that have a high-probability of breaking existing code label to the entry if your change includes a high-risk change (i.e. potential for performance impact or unexpected regression) that should be flagged
    • Updates unreleased work already in Changelog, no new entry necessary
  • UX feedback:
    • All UX related changes have been reviewed by a designer
    • No UX review needed
  • Followup issues:
    • Followup issues created
    • No followup issues
  • Database migrations:
    • Ensure that your downrev is up to date with the latest revision on main
    • Ensure that your downgrade() migration is correct and works
      • If a downgrade migration is not possible for this change, please call this out in the PR description!
    • No migrations
  • Documentation:
    • Documentation complete, PR opened in fidesdocs
    • Documentation issue created in fidesdocs
    • If there are any new client scopes created as part of the pull request, remember to update public-facing documentation that references our scope registry
    • No documentation updates required

@vercel
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

vercel Bot commented May 12, 2026

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.

Project Deployment Actions Updated (UTC)
fides-plus-nightly Ready Ready Preview, Comment May 15, 2026 7:26pm
1 Skipped Deployment
Project Deployment Actions Updated (UTC)
fides-privacy-center Ignored Ignored May 15, 2026 7:26pm

Request Review

@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown

github-actions Bot commented May 12, 2026

Title Lines Statements Branches Functions
admin-ui Coverage: 9%
6.94% (3176/45761) 6.32% (1676/26482) 4.8% (651/13538)
fides-js Coverage: 78%
79.17% (1977/2497) 66.25% (1249/1885) 73.31% (349/476)
privacy-center Coverage: 85%
82.53% (364/441) 79.74% (189/237) 74.07% (60/81)

@codecov
Copy link
Copy Markdown

codecov Bot commented May 12, 2026

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 85.61%. Comparing base (6d220c9) to head (a85b475).
⚠️ Report is 40 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #8161      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   85.23%   85.61%   +0.37%     
==========================================
  Files         638      658      +20     
  Lines       42011    42869     +858     
  Branches     4937     5019      +82     
==========================================
+ Hits        35808    36702     +894     
+ Misses       5096     5063      -33     
+ Partials     1107     1104       -3     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

@nreyes-dev nreyes-dev marked this pull request as ready for review May 12, 2026 14:39
@nreyes-dev nreyes-dev requested review from a team as code owners May 12, 2026 14:39
@nreyes-dev nreyes-dev requested review from gilluminate and johnewart and removed request for a team May 12, 2026 14:39
@nreyes-dev
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

/code-review

claude[bot]

This comment was marked as resolved.

Comment thread clients/admin-ui/src/features/privacy-requests/constants.ts Outdated
Comment thread clients/admin-ui/src/features/privacy-requests/constants.ts
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@gilluminate gilluminate left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

FE code looks good.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@johnewart johnewart left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Nothing blocking, just 2 questions; seems like we could make the filter a lot simpler to reason about but it's not a show-stopper

Comment thread src/fides/service/privacy_request/privacy_request_query_utils.py
Comment thread src/fides/service/privacy_request/privacy_request_query_utils.py
@nreyes-dev nreyes-dev added this pull request to the merge queue May 15, 2026
Merged via the queue into main with commit 0e5129e May 15, 2026
75 checks passed
@nreyes-dev nreyes-dev deleted the nreyes/eng-2907 branch May 15, 2026 23:24
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