-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 15
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
Duplicates backend & integration tests #6521
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
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.
Copilot reviewed 5 out of 18 changed files in this pull request and generated 2 comments.
Files not reviewed (13)
- services/121-service/src/scripts/sql/mock-introduce-duplicates.sql: Language not supported
- services/121-service/swagger.json: Language not supported
- services/121-service/src/registration/validators/registrations-input-validator.ts: Evaluated as low risk
- services/121-service/src/scripts/seed-multiple-nlrc-mock.ts: Evaluated as low risk
- services/121-service/src/registration/const/filter-operation.const.ts: Evaluated as low risk
- services/121-service/src/registration/interfaces/get-duplicates-result.interface.ts: Evaluated as low risk
- services/121-service/src/registration/services/registrations-pagination.service.ts: Evaluated as low risk
- services/121-service/test/helpers/registration.helper.ts: Evaluated as low risk
- services/121-service/src/registration/registration-view.entity.ts: Evaluated as low risk
- services/121-service/src/registration/registrations.service.ts: Evaluated as low risk
- services/121-service/src/scripts/seed-mock-helpers.ts: Evaluated as low risk
- services/121-service/src/registration/repositories/registration-scoped.repository.ts: Evaluated as low risk
- services/121-service/src/registration/registrations.controller.ts: Evaluated as low risk
Comments suppressed due to low confidence (2)
services/121-service/src/registration/dto/duplicate.dto.ts:3
- Resolve or remove the TODO comment about naming conventions.
// TODO: Discuss should this be name DuplicateReponseDto? (as in the guidelines) And that the api returns DuplicateReponseDto[]?
services/121-service/test/registrations/duplicates/get-duplicates.test.ts:109
- [nitpick] The test description is unclear. It should be rephrased for better readability.
it(`should not return isDuplicateAccessibleWithinScope is false and no name for a duplicate if the duplicate registration is out of the scope of the user`, async () => {
services/121-service/src/registration/enum/duplicate-status.enum.ts
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
@ApiProperty({ example: ['phoneNumber'] }) | ||
public readonly attributeNames: string[]; | ||
|
||
@ApiProperty({ example: 'true' }) |
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.
I added this to help the frontend with this frame
@@ -0,0 +1,23 @@ | |||
import { ApiProperty } from '@nestjs/swagger'; | |||
|
|||
// TODO: Discuss should this be name DuplicateReponseDto? (as in the guidelines) And that the api returns DuplicateReponseDto[]? |
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.
An array of response seems weird. It's sort of one response which can have an arrays of duplicates
@@ -0,0 +1,222 @@ | |||
import { RegistrationStatusEnum } from '@121-service/src/registration/enum/registration-status.enum'; |
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.
I did not add any unit tests. The reason for this is 90 % of logic is in the queries. And therefore the scenario's I could think of are all covered in integration tests. Do you see opportunities for unit testing @diderikvw
dd32980
to
fcd69b2
Compare
fcd69b2
to
ea2f8e6
Compare
AB#33530 AB#33533 AB#33540
This PR adds:
Describe your changes
Checklist before requesting a review
I do not think it's wise to merge this before we have k6 tests
Portalicious preview deployment
This PR does not have any preview deployments yet.