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’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[NAE-1660] Filter action API #83

Merged
merged 21 commits into from Jul 19, 2022
Merged

[NAE-1660] Filter action API #83

merged 21 commits into from Jul 19, 2022

Conversation

timbez
Copy link
Contributor

@timbez timbez commented Jul 14, 2022

Description

ActionDelegate Filter API, with changes to preexisting engine processes such as org_group, preference_filter_item

Implements NAE-1660

Dependencies

Third party dependencies

  • none

Blocking Pull requests

How Has Been This Tested?

FilterApiTest class and manual testing with a helper process

  • FilterApiTest (src/test/groovy/com/netgrif/application/engine/action/FilterApiTest.groovy)

Test Configuration

  • spring unit test

Checklist:

  • My code follows the style guidelines of this project
  • I have performed a self-review of my own code
  • My changes have been checked, personally or remotely, with @...
  • I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
  • I have resolved all conflicts with the target branch of the PR
  • I have updated and synced my code with the target branch
  • I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
  • New and existing tests pass locally with my changes:
    • Lint test
    • Unit tests
    • Integration tests
  • I have checked my contribution with code analysis tools:
  • I have made corresponding changes to the documentation:
    • Developer documentation
    • User Guides
    • Migration Guides

timbez added 10 commits June 30, 2022 16:28
- add action delegate methods to manipulate filters, preference items
- extend methods in ActionDelegate
- update processes org_group and preference_filter_item with new transitions to manipulate their data
- add new method to NextGroupService
- add test process
- fix set events (add ids)
- maintain case consistency in changeFilter, changeMenuItem
- add some todos
- cosmetic changes
- fix incorrect method logic
- update roles in org_group.xml
- update process (preference_filter_item)
- add all roles to system
- search using elastic in filter api methods
- write tests
- change NextGroupService method (elastic search instead of mongo)
- fix javadocs
- remove uri from filter methods for simplification
- add test
- remove demo runner code
- fix query
@timbez timbez added improvement A change that improves on an existing feature breaking change Fix or feature that would cause existing functionality doesn't work as expected labels Jul 14, 2022
@pull-request-quantifier-deprecated

This PR has 1870 quantified lines of changes. In general, a change size of upto 200 lines is ideal for the best PR experience!


Quantification details

Label      : Extra Large
Size       : +1815 -55
Percentile : 100%

Total files changed: 48

Change summary by file extension:
.md : +30 -0
.groovy : +629 -16
.java : +474 -14
.properties : +2 -0
.xml : +680 -25

Change counts above are quantified counts, based on the PullRequestQuantifier customizations.

Why proper sizing of changes matters

Optimal pull request sizes drive a better predictable PR flow as they strike a
balance between between PR complexity and PR review overhead. PRs within the
optimal size (typical small, or medium sized PRs) mean:

  • Fast and predictable releases to production:
    • Optimal size changes are more likely to be reviewed faster with fewer
      iterations.
    • Similarity in low PR complexity drives similar review times.
  • Review quality is likely higher as complexity is lower:
    • Bugs are more likely to be detected.
    • Code inconsistencies are more likely to be detetcted.
  • Knowledge sharing is improved within the participants:
    • Small portions can be assimilated better.
  • Better engineering practices are exercised:
    • Solving big problems by dividing them in well contained, smaller problems.
    • Exercising separation of concerns within the code changes.

What can I do to optimize my changes

  • Use the PullRequestQuantifier to quantify your PR accurately
    • Create a context profile for your repo using the context generator
    • Exclude files that are not necessary to be reviewed or do not increase the review complexity. Example: Autogenerated code, docs, project IDE setting files, binaries, etc. Check out the Excluded section from your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
    • Understand your typical change complexity, drive towards the desired complexity by adjusting the label mapping in your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
    • Only use the labels that matter to you, see context specification to customize your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Change your engineering behaviors
    • For PRs that fall outside of the desired spectrum, review the details and check if:
      • Your PR could be split in smaller, self-contained PRs instead
      • Your PR only solves one particular issue. (For example, don't refactor and code new features in the same PR).

How to interpret the change counts in git diff output

  • One line was added: +1 -0
  • One line was deleted: +0 -1
  • One line was modified: +1 -1 (git diff doesn't know about modified, it will
    interpret that line like one addition plus one deletion)
  • Change percentiles: Change characteristics (addition, deletion, modification)
    of this PR in relation to all other PRs within the repository.


Was this comment helpful? 👍  :ok_hand:  :thumbsdown: (Email)
Customize PullRequestQuantifier for this repository.

# Conflicts:
#	src/main/groovy/com/netgrif/application/engine/startup/DefaultFiltersRunner.groovy
#	src/main/groovy/com/netgrif/application/engine/startup/DemoRunner.groovy
@machacjozef machacjozef requested a review from minop July 19, 2022 11:49
@dpulls
Copy link

dpulls bot commented Jul 19, 2022

🎉 All dependencies have been resolved !

 - fix code smells
@sonarcloud
Copy link

sonarcloud bot commented Jul 19, 2022

SonarCloud Quality Gate failed.    Quality Gate failed

Bug A 0 Bugs
Vulnerability A 0 Vulnerabilities
Security Hotspot A 0 Security Hotspots
Code Smell A 0 Code Smells

6.1% 6.1% Coverage
0.0% 0.0% Duplication

@machacjozef machacjozef merged commit 0600e22 into release/6.2.0 Jul 19, 2022
@machacjozef machacjozef deleted the NAE-1660 branch July 19, 2022 13:29
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
breaking change Fix or feature that would cause existing functionality doesn't work as expected Extra Large improvement A change that improves on an existing feature
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants