-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 100
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
Support multiple tax years in UI, move forms to ustaxes-forms #662
Conversation
0a61ee6
to
cc0d5c6
Compare
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #662 +/- ##
===========================================
- Coverage 71.16% 55.85% -15.32%
===========================================
Files 116 66 -50
Lines 3815 1443 -2372
Branches 595 320 -275
===========================================
- Hits 2715 806 -1909
+ Misses 1086 624 -462
+ Partials 14 13 -1
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
Add tests for year selector
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.
Has the same error as before of error messages for bad input not showing up on some pages, like the first page
6627f99
to
55c75de
Compare
Checking out 9b62cff should show the above failed test, where the Save button is pressed and the component rerenders and resets the data without letting the errors display. |
92b0e53
to
b36100e
Compare
b36100e
to
77f205e
Compare
77f205e
to
dec5749
Compare
7e1d195
to
593b3cd
Compare
Comment has been resolved by Aidan GrimshawFiling status should throw an error and not allow progression to the next page until it is filled out Browser metadata
|
State wages seems to sometimes throw an error when not filled out, sometimes not Browser metadata
|
Comment has been resolved by Aidan GrimshawA reviewer left a comment: I tried a ton of times and I was eventually successful in getting the form to pass without that field filled, but I think what is happening is the field was populated with "Single", which is then disallowed by the addition of a spouse. The form field removes the corresponding So you should be able to see this on master now. Browser metadata
|
8b4b326
to
b59f41e
Compare
07f5995
to
9a60faf
Compare
# Conflicts: # package-lock.json # src/components/Questions.tsx # src/components/RefundBankAccount.tsx # src/components/TaxPayer/TaxPayer.tsx # src/components/income/RealEstate.tsx # src/components/income/W2JobInfo.tsx # src/tests/components/Taxpayer.test.tsx
4d85f44
to
f8ac587
Compare
5bb5ee5
to
e25de85
Compare
I've finally convinced myself this strategy is a bad one. See #778 |
This is replaced by #778 |
What kind of change does this PR introduce?
A redo of #566
Forms are now contained in ustaxes-forms. Tax years will be modeled using separate branches of that repo, and each branch will be added here as a git submodule.
Added scripts to set up submodules for 2020 and 2021.
Added the UI to enable building 2021 returns.
Data models and validations have been moved to ustaxes-core. So our structure now is:
Note: Setting up this structure did require updating NPM. This does not work on NPM 6.
npm ci
will also fail for users running npm6, and there is no way to warn them, sinceci
doesn't run any of thepreinstall
/prepare
tasks before updatingnode_modules
. We display an error in front ofstart
ortest
.About complexity, of course this adds a ton. If a user needs to add a new piece of UI for a new piece of user data, and update the data model, and update a tax form with that new piece of data, that will be three pull requests. On the other hand, UI PRs can't make updates to the data model or tax forms, and can't break tests in those projects. So it ...is also good? Perhaps time will tell.