-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 6
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
[#2207] Avoid showing the current status of the case twice in the situation where the zaak.status URL isn't in the status history #1139
Conversation
@alextreme I'll look into the failing test. Apparently we have a conflict between showing too much and too little with the E-suite's behavior in this case. Do you happen to have a reference to where this (status duplicated) happened? |
@pi-sigma from my analysis (see the Taiga issue) the duplication occurs regardless of zaaktype when our eSuite-workaround is necessary |
By the way, Andy is checking if he can fix in the eSuite that this workaround is no longer necessary |
That would be nice! |
Not sure what can be done about the failing test. If However, the second test concerning missing statuses and the hidden upload button (link) is broken; it passes independently of whether |
Discuss the failing tests at the office next week with Steven or Bart. If fetch_status_history returns an empty list then having statuses be the empty list makes sense, this seems to be different than the situation we see so imho this test is to be rewritten or if it's no longer applicable removed. |
…uation where the zaak.status URL isn't in the status history
c8ff97b
to
013e1e2
Compare
@patch( | ||
"open_inwoner.openzaak.clients.ZakenClient.fetch_status_history", autospec=True | ||
) | ||
def test_e_suite_missing_current_status_fetch_status( |
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.
@alextreme I'm now unsure what is still and issue and what is not, but from what I understood from the taiga issue, this regression test is no longer needed?
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.
Indeed it can be removed
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## develop #1139 +/- ##
===========================================
- Coverage 95.07% 95.07% -0.01%
===========================================
Files 948 948
Lines 33556 33544 -12
===========================================
- Hits 31903 31891 -12
Misses 1653 1653 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
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.
test_e_suite_missing_current_status_upload_button_displayed
should probably also be removed
def test_e_suite_missing_current_status_upload_button_displayed( |
013e1e2
to
09bdc1a
Compare
…