Group review task #25
Conversation
…ns for compatibility with multiple reviewing tasks
| reviewers = self.page.current_workflow_task.reviewers | ||
| if reviewers.filter(pk=self.reviewer.pk).exists(): | ||
| try: | ||
| actions = {action[0] for action in self.page.current_workflow_task.get_actions(self.page, user=None, reviewer=self.reviewer)} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If current_workflow_task is defined for this page, but is something other than ReviewTask / GroupReviewTask, then its get_actions method will not accept a reviewer argument, and this will fail with a TypeError (which doesn't get caught). I think it's best to keep the type check in place here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've added an except for the TypeError, would this work? I agree the type check works currently, but ideally I'd like to make review functionality usable by custom tasks via the mixin factored out in the next PR, #27. Otherwise I could check for inheriting from that mixin, I suppose?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sounds good - yep, I think that change is worth making in #27. I'm a bit wary about catching TypeError, as that could mask legitimate errors too - I guess the same is true to a lesser extent for AttributeError too, so it would be good to change that to an if self.page.current_workflow_task: (assuming that's the case it's meant to be catching...)
|
I can confirm that tests pass when run against the Wagtail feature/workflow branch now that wagtail/wagtail#5894 is merged. |
Adds a
GroupReviewTaskanalogous toGroupApprovalTaskin Wagtail core, email notifications, and tests for email notificationsRelies on wagtail/wagtail#5894