feat(j-s): New Subpoena #16168
feat(j-s): New Subpoena #16168
Conversation
…ment-case-arraignment-date
…ment-case-arraignment-date
WalkthroughThe changes in this pull request introduce a new Changes
Possibly related PRs
Suggested reviewers
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
Documentation and Community
|
Datadog ReportAll test runs ✅ 6 Total Test Services: 0 Failed, 6 Passed Test Services
🔻 Code Coverage Decreases vs Default Branch (2) |
…ment-case-new-subpoena
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 24
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (33)
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/index.ts (1)
1-2: Good module structure. Consider adding documentation.The
index.tsfile follows good practices by exporting theSubpoenaServiceandSubpoenamodel separately. This structure promotes modularity and adheres to NextJS backend best practices.Consider adding a brief comment or JSDoc to describe the purpose of this module and its exports. This can help other developers quickly understand the module's role in the system. For example:
/** * Subpoena Module * * This module exports the SubpoenaService for handling subpoena-related operations * and the Subpoena model for defining the structure of subpoena data. */ export { SubpoenaService } from './subpoena.service' export { Subpoena } from './models/subpoena.model'apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/index.ts (1)
4-5: LGTM! Consider grouping exports by type.The new exports,
DefendantExistsGuardandCurrentDefendant, are good additions that enhance the module's functionality. They align well with NextJS best practices by modularizing specific components for route protection and request handling.For better code organization, consider grouping the exports by type. For example:
// Models export { Defendant } from './models/defendant.model' export { CivilClaimant } from './models/civilClaimant.model' // Services export { DefendantService } from './defendant.service' // Guards and Decorators export { DefendantExistsGuard } from './guards/defendantExists.guard' export { CurrentDefendant } from './guards/defendant.decorator'This grouping improves readability and makes it easier to understand the different types of exports at a glance.
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/test/subpoenaController/getSubpoenaPdfRolesRules.spec.ts (2)
18-18: LGTM: Metadata retrieval updated correctly. Consider improving type safety.The metadata retrieval has been properly updated to use
SubpoenaController.prototype.getSubpoenaPdf, which is consistent with the changes in the test focus.Consider improving type safety by replacing
any[]with a more specific type for therulesvariable. For example:let rules: Array<(request: any, response: any) => boolean>;This would provide better type checking and make the code more self-documenting.
Line range hint
1-32: LGTM: Overall test structure is sound. Consider enhancing assertions.The test file structure and content are well-maintained after the changes. The assertions correctly check for the presence of all expected rules for the
getSubpoenaPdfmethod.Consider enhancing the test by checking not just the presence of rules, but also their order if it's significant. This could be done by using
expect(rules).toEqual([...])instead of multipleexpect(rules).toContain(...)assertions. For example:expect(rules).toEqual([ prosecutorRule, prosecutorRepresentativeRule, publicProsecutorStaffRule, districtCourtJudgeRule, districtCourtRegistrarRule, districtCourtAssistantRule ]);This would ensure that the rules are not only present but also in the correct order, if that's important for your use case.
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/subpoena.module.ts (1)
19-23: Controllers array updated correctly.The new controllers have been properly added to the
@Moduledecorator's controllers array. This is in line with NestJS best practices for module configuration.Consider ordering the controllers from most specific to least specific to optimize route matching:
controllers: [ LimitedAccessSubpoenaController, InternalSubpoenaController, SubpoenaController, ],apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/test/limitedAccessSubpoenaController/limitedAccessSubpoenaControllerGuards.spec.ts (2)
9-15: Consider using a more specific type for guards.The test suite setup looks good overall. However, consider replacing the
any[]type for theguardsvariable with a more specific type to improve type safety. You could useArray<Function | object>or create a custom type that represents the possible guard types.Example:
type Guard = Function | { new (): any }; let guards: Guard[];This change would maintain type safety while still allowing for the different guard types you're expecting.
17-29: LGTM: Comprehensive guard configuration test.The test case thoroughly verifies the guard configuration for the LimitedAccessSubpoenaController. It checks both the number of guards and their specific types, which is crucial for ensuring proper access control.
For improved readability, consider extracting the expected guard types into an array constant at the beginning of the test file. This would make it easier to update if the guard configuration changes and would reduce repetition in the test case.
Example:
const EXPECTED_GUARD_TYPES = [ JwtAuthGuard, RolesGuard, CaseExistsGuard, CaseTypeGuard, CaseReadGuard, DefendantExistsGuard, SubpoenaExistsOptionalGuard ]; // In the test case EXPECTED_GUARD_TYPES.forEach((GuardType, index) => { if (GuardType === CaseTypeGuard) { expect(guards[index]).toEqual({ allowedCaseTypes: indictmentCases, }); } else { expect(new guards[index]()).toBeInstanceOf(GuardType); } });This refactoring would make the test more maintainable and easier to read.
apps/judicial-system/backend/migrations/20240926131706-update-subpoena.js (1)
1-3: Remove redundant 'use strict' directiveThe 'use strict' directive is unnecessary in ES modules as they are automatically in strict mode.
Apply this change:
-'use strict' module.exports = {🧰 Tools
🪛 Biome
[error] 1-1: Redundant use strict directive.
The entire contents of JavaScript modules are automatically in strict mode, with no statement needed to initiate it.
Safe fix: Remove the redundant use strict directive.(lint/suspicious/noRedundantUseStrict)
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/test/limitedAccessSubpoenaController/getSubpoenaPdf.spec.ts (2)
17-18: LGTM: Test setup updated with subpoena-related dataThe test setup has been correctly updated to include subpoena-related data, which aligns with the new focus of the controller. The use of TypeScript for type assertions is a good practice for maintaining type safety.
Consider using a more descriptive mock data for the
subpoenaobject. For example:const subpoena = { id: subpoenaId, type: 'limited_access', status: 'active' } as SubpoenaThis would make the test more robust and potentially catch issues related to specific subpoena properties.
Also applies to: 20-20
39-47: LGTM: Controller method call updatedThe method call has been correctly updated to use
limitedAccessSubpoenaController.getSubpoenaPdf, which aligns with the new controller name. The addition ofsubpoenaIdandsubpoenaas parameters is consistent with the new focus on subpoenas.Consider using an object with named parameters for the method call to improve readability and maintainability. For example:
await limitedAccessSubpoenaController.getSubpoenaPdf({ caseId, defendantId, subpoenaId, case: theCase, defendant, subpoena, res, });This approach would make the function call more self-documenting and easier to modify in the future.
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/test/subpoenaController/getSubpoenaPdf.spec.ts (1)
16-16: LGTM: Test setup updated appropriately with a minor suggestionThe changes to the describe block and variable declarations accurately reflect the shift to a subpoena-centric approach. The use of TypeScript for type assertions is good practice.
However, to improve type safety, consider using a more complete mock object for the subpoena:
const subpoena = { id: subpoenaId, /* other required properties */ } as Subpoena;This will ensure that the mock object more closely resembles an actual Subpoena instance.
Also applies to: 18-19, 21-21
apps/judicial-system/api/src/app/modules/defendant/models/defendant.model.ts (2)
81-82: LGTM: New subpoenas field is well-defined.The
subpoenasfield is correctly implemented as an optional array ofSubpoenaobjects. The use of@Fielddecorator andreadonlymodifier is appropriate.Consider adding a brief comment explaining the relationship between a defendant and subpoenas for better code documentation. For example:
/** * Array of subpoenas associated with this defendant. * A defendant can have multiple subpoenas for different purposes or court appearances. */ @Field(() => [Subpoena], { nullable: true }) readonly subpoenas?: Subpoena[]
11-11: Consider the broader impact of introducing the Subpoena relationship.The addition of the
Subpoenaimport and thesubpoenasfield to theDefendantmodel is a significant change that introduces a new relationship between these entities. This aligns well with the PR objective of introducing a new subpoena feature.Please consider the following points:
- Ensure that any existing code that works with
Defendantobjects is updated to handle the newsubpoenasfield appropriately.- Update any relevant database schemas or ORM configurations to reflect this new relationship.
- Review and update GraphQL queries and mutations that involve defendants to include subpoena information where necessary.
- Consider adding unit tests to verify the correct behavior of the new relationship between
DefendantandSubpoena.These changes may have implications across the judicial system module, so a thorough review of related components is recommended.
Also applies to: 81-82
apps/judicial-system/web/src/components/PdfButton/PdfButton.tsx (1)
49-51: Approved: Consistent handling of newelementIdtypeThe updated logic for constructing the
postfixvariable correctly handles both string and string array cases forelementId. This change is consistent with the Props interface update and provides the necessary flexibility.A minor optimization suggestion:
Consider using a ternary operator for a more concise expression:
const postfix = elementId ? `/${Array.isArray(elementId) ? elementId.join('/') : elementId}` : ''This maintains the same functionality while slightly reducing the code complexity.
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/test/createTestingDefendantModule.ts (1)
Line range hint
29-53: LGTM: Module setup changes are consistentThe removal of LimitedAccessDefendantController from the controllers array and PdfService from the providers array is consistent with the overall changes to the module. The module setup continues to adhere to NextJS best practices for testing modules and maintains good TypeScript usage for type safety.
For consistency, consider updating the comment above the providers array to reflect the current list of providers:
controllers: [DefendantController, InternalDefendantController], + // List of providers used in the testing module providers: [ SharedAuthModule, MessageService, UserService, CourtService, CaseService, // ... (rest of the providers) ],This small change would improve code documentation and maintainability.
apps/judicial-system/message-handler/src/app/messageHandler.service.ts (1)
36-42: Approve changes with a minor suggestion for readabilityThe modifications to handle
message.elementIdas either a single value or an array improve the flexibility of the URL construction. This change aligns well with RESTful practices and demonstrates good use of TypeScript features.To further enhance readability, consider extracting the URL segment construction into a separate function:
private constructElementIdSegment(elementId: string | string[] | undefined): string { if (!elementId) return ''; const segments = Array.isArray(elementId) ? elementId.join('/') : elementId; return `/${segments}`; } // Then in handleMessage: `${this.config.backendUrl}/api/internal${ message.caseId ? `/case/${message.caseId}` : '' }/${messageEndpoint[message.type]}${ this.constructElementIdSegment(message.elementId) }`This refactoring would make the URL construction more modular and easier to understand at a glance.
apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Subpoena/Subpoena.strings.ts (1)
63-68: LGTM! Consider adding a period to the description.The new
newSubpoenaButtonTextmessage is well-structured and consistent with the existing patterns in the file. It aligns with the PR objectives of introducing a new subpoena feature.Consider adding a period at the end of the description for consistency with other messages in the file:
newSubpoenaButtonText: { id: 'judicial.system.core:subpoena.new_subpoena_button_text', defaultMessage: 'Nýtt fyrirkall', description: - 'Notaður sem texti á takka sem býður notanda að búa til nýtt fyrirkall.', + 'Notaður sem texti á takka sem býður notanda að búa til nýtt fyrirkall.', },apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/internalSubpoena.controller.ts (2)
Line range hint
72-93: LGTM: Improved method signature and guardsThe changes to the
deliverSubpoenaToPolicemethod signature and guards are well-implemented:
- Adding
subpoenaIdas a route parameter improves the RESTful nature of the API.- The
@CurrentSubpoena()decorator enhances code reusability and separation of concerns.- The
SubpoenaExistsGuardensures data integrity and prevents potential errors.These changes align well with TypeScript and NestJS best practices.
Consider updating the debug log message to use template literals consistently:
this.logger.debug( `Delivering subpoena ${subpoenaId} to police for defendant ${defendantId} and case ${caseId}`, )This change makes the string interpolation more consistent and easier to read.
95-102: LGTM: Simplified subpoena delivery logicThe changes in the
deliverSubpoenaToPolicemethod body are well-implemented:
- Direct use of the
subpoenaobject instead of PDF generation simplifies the logic and improves type safety.- This change is consistent with the removal of PdfService and aligns with the PR objective.
For consistency with the method signature, consider updating the
deliverSubpoenaToPolicecall to use named parameters:return await this.subpoenaService.deliverSubpoenaToPolice({ case: theCase, defendant, subpoena, user: deliverDto.user, })This change would make the code more readable and less prone to errors if the parameter order changes in the future.
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/test/createTestingSubpoenaModule.ts (2)
29-76: LGTM: Well-structured testing module setup with a minor suggestionThe testing module setup follows NestJS best practices, providing mock implementations for services and models, which is excellent for isolation in unit tests. The use of ConfigModule.forRoot() for configuration management is correct.
Consider extracting the mock implementations for models (Subpoena and Defendant) into separate constants or functions to improve readability and reusability. For example:
const createMockModel = () => ({ findOne: jest.fn(), findAll: jest.fn(), create: jest.fn(), update: jest.fn(), destroy: jest.fn(), findByPk: jest.fn(), }); // Then use it in the providers array { provide: getModelToken(Subpoena), useValue: createMockModel(), }, { provide: getModelToken(Defendant), useValue: createMockModel(), },This approach would make the code more DRY and easier to maintain.
99-110: LGTM: Proper module closure and return, with a suggestion for improvementThe code correctly closes the module to clean up resources and returns an object with all the retrieved instances, allowing for easy destructuring in tests.
Consider using object property shorthand for a more concise return statement:
return { userService, pdfService, subpoenaModel, subpoenaService, subpoenaController, internalSubpoenaController, limitedAccessSubpoenaController, };This change would make the code more aligned with modern JavaScript practices and improve readability.
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/defendant.controller.ts (2)
Line range hint
1-32: Imports cleanup looks good, consider further optimization.The removal of unused imports is a good practice and aligns with the changes made to the controller. This helps in maintaining a clean and efficient codebase.
Consider using named imports for
ServiceRequirementandUserto potentially benefit from tree-shaking:import { ServiceRequirement, User } from '@island.is/judicial-system/types'
Line range hint
1-132: Clarification needed: NestJS backend vs NextJS frontendThis file is part of a NestJS backend, not a NextJS frontend. The structure and practices used here are appropriate for NestJS. The coding guidelines mention NextJS best practices, which are not applicable to this backend code.
Consider reviewing and updating the coding guidelines to differentiate between frontend (NextJS) and backend (NestJS) best practices. This will ensure more accurate and relevant code reviews in the future.
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/formatters/subpoenaPdf.ts (2)
Line range hint
28-35: LGTM: Function signature updated correctlyThe
createSubpoenafunction signature has been updated to include new optional parameters, which provides more flexibility. The use of optional parameters is a good TypeScript practice.Consider adding JSDoc comments to describe the purpose of each new parameter, especially
subpoena, to improve code documentation.
157-163: LGTM: Confirmation footer added conditionallyThe addition of a confirmation footer when a subpoena is present is a good improvement. The use of optional chaining (?.) when accessing
theCase.judgeproperties is a good TypeScript practice.Consider extracting the judge-related properties into a separate variable to improve readability:
const judge = { name: theCase.judge?.name || '', title: theCase.judge?.title, institution: theCase.judge?.institution?.name || '', }; addConfirmation(doc, { ...judge, date: subpoena.created, });apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Overview/Overview.tsx (1)
126-129: Good restructuring of data passed to SubpoenaType component.The changes improve the structure of data passed to the
SubpoenaTypecomponent and introduce a new behavior based on the arraignment schedule. This follows React best practices for rendering lists.To further enhance type safety, consider defining an interface for the object passed to
subpoenaItems:interface SubpoenaItem { defendant: Defendant; // Replace 'Defendant' with the actual type disabled: boolean; }Then use it in the map function:
subpoenaItems={workingCase.defendants.map((defendant): SubpoenaItem => ({ defendant, disabled: isArraignmentScheduled, }))}This will ensure type consistency and make the code more maintainable.
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/pdf.service.ts (2)
Line range hint
296-300: Consider adding documentation for the new subpoena parameter.While the changes are well-implemented, it would be beneficial to add a brief comment or JSDoc for the
subpoenaparameter in thegetSubpoenaPdfmethod. This would help other developers understand the purpose and expected content of this new parameter.Consider adding a JSDoc comment like this:
/** * Generates a PDF for a subpoena. * @param theCase - The case associated with the subpoena. * @param defendant - The defendant involved in the case. * @param subpoena - The subpoena details to be included in the PDF. * @param arraignmentDate - Optional. The date of arraignment. * @param location - Optional. The location of the court. * @param subpoenaType - Optional. The type of subpoena. * @returns A Promise that resolves to a Buffer containing the PDF data. */ async getSubpoenaPdf( theCase: Case, defendant: Defendant, subpoena: Subpoena, arraignmentDate?: Date, location?: string, subpoenaType?: SubpoenaType, ): Promise<Buffer> { // ... existing implementation ... }
**Incomplete updates to `getSubpoenaPdf` method calls** Several calls to `getSubpoenaPdf` are missing the new `subpoena` parameter. Please ensure all callers include this parameter to maintain consistency and prevent potential errors. - `apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/test/subpoenaController/getSubpoenaPdf.spec.ts` - `apps/judicial-system/api/src/app/modules/file/file.controller.ts` - `apps/judicial-system/api/src/app/modules/file/limitedAccessFile.controller.ts`🔗 Analysis chain
Line range hint
296-307: LGTM: Method signature update for getSubpoenaPdf.The addition of the
subpoenaparameter to thegetSubpoenaPdfmethod and its usage in thecreateSubpoenafunction call are consistent with the new subpoena feature. The changes are well-integrated into the existing code.To ensure that all callers of this method have been updated accordingly, please run the following script:
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify all calls to getSubpoenaPdf include the new subpoena parameter # Test: Search for calls to getSubpoenaPdf. Expect: All calls include the subpoena parameter. rg --type typescript -A 5 'getSubpoenaPdf\s*\('Length of output: 84
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify all calls to getSubpoenaPdf include the new subpoena parameter # Test: Search for calls to getSubpoenaPdf in TypeScript files. Expect: All calls include the subpoena parameter. rg -A 5 'getSubpoenaPdf\s*\(' --glob '*.ts*'Length of output: 6831
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/limitedAccessSubpoena.controller.ts (1)
53-53: Update@ApiTagsto Reflect Controller's FocusThe controller is now centered around subpoenas rather than defendants. Consider updating the
@ApiTags('limited access defendants')to@ApiTags('limited access subpoenas')for consistency and to accurately represent the controller's functionality.apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/components/SubpoenaType/SubpoenaType.tsx (1)
53-53: SimplifymarginBottomcalculation for better readabilityThe ternary condition in
marginBottomis complex and may affect readability. Consider simplifying it or extracting it into a helper variable.Possible refactor:
- index === subpoenaItems.length - 1 ? 0 : item.children ? 5 : 3 + const isLastItem = index === subpoenaItems.length - 1 + const marginBottom = isLastItem ? 0 : item.children ? 5 : 3Then update the
marginBottomprop:<Box key={item.defendant.id} - marginBottom={ - index === subpoenaItems.length - 1 ? 0 : item.children ? 5 : 3 - } + marginBottom={marginBottom} >apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/subpoena.service.ts (1)
144-147: Address the TODO: Enhance error handling after updating the subpoena.The TODO comment suggests improving error handling by checking how many rows were affected during the subpoena update and posting an error event if necessary. Implementing this would ensure that the update operation is successful and that any failures are properly logged and handled.
Would you like assistance in implementing the error handling enhancements for this section?
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/test/caseController/update.spec.ts (1)
878-879: Consider Simplifying Variable DeclarationsLines 878-879 introduce
const subpoenaId1 = uuid()andconst subpoenaId2 = uuid(). To enhance readability and maintainability, consider using an array to handle multiple subpoena IDs, especially if more IDs might be added in the future.apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/case.service.ts (1)
275-290: Consider the performance impact of usingseparate: truewhen includingsubpoenasUsing
separate: truefor includingsubpoenasunderdefendantscauses Sequelize to execute separate queries, which can have performance implications if there are many defendants. Verify that this is acceptable for the expected data volume.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (42)
- apps/judicial-system/api/src/app/modules/defendant/models/defendant.model.ts (2 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/api/src/app/modules/defendant/models/subpoena.model.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/api/src/app/modules/file/file.controller.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/migrations/20240926131706-update-subpoena.js (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/formatters/subpoenaPdf.ts (4 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/case.module.ts (2 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/case.service.ts (8 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/internalCase.service.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/limitedAccessCase.service.ts (2 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/pdf.service.ts (3 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/test/caseController/update.spec.ts (2 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/defendant.controller.ts (2 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/defendant.module.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/index.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/test/createTestingDefendantModule.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/test/defendantController/getSubpoenaPdfGuards.spec.ts (0 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/guards/subpoenaExists.guard.ts (2 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/index.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/internalSubpoena.controller.ts (3 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/limitedAccessSubpoena.controller.ts (2 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/models/subpoena.model.ts (2 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/subpoena.controller.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/subpoena.module.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/subpoena.service.ts (5 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/test/createTestingSubpoenaModule.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/test/limitedAccessSubpoenaController/getSubpoenaPdf.spec.ts (3 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/test/limitedAccessSubpoenaController/getSubpoenaPdfRolesRules.spec.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/test/limitedAccessSubpoenaController/limitedAccessSubpoenaControllerGuards.spec.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/test/subpoenaController/getSubpoenaPdf.spec.ts (3 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/test/subpoenaController/getSubpoenaPdfRolesRules.spec.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/test/subpoenaController/subpoenaControllerGuards.spec.ts (2 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/message-handler/src/app/messageHandler.service.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/web/src/components/FormProvider/case.graphql (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/web/src/components/FormProvider/limitedAccessCase.graphql (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/web/src/components/IndictmentCaseFilesList/IndictmentCaseFilesList.strings.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/web/src/components/IndictmentCaseFilesList/IndictmentCaseFilesList.tsx (2 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/web/src/components/PdfButton/PdfButton.tsx (2 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Overview/Overview.tsx (2 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Subpoena/Subpoena.strings.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Subpoena/Subpoena.tsx (7 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/components/SubpoenaType/SubpoenaType.tsx (3 hunks)
- libs/judicial-system/message/src/lib/message.ts (1 hunks)
💤 Files not reviewed due to no reviewable changes (1)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/test/defendantController/getSubpoenaPdfGuards.spec.ts
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (41)
apps/judicial-system/api/src/app/modules/defendant/models/defendant.model.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/api/src/app/modules/defendant/models/subpoena.model.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/api/src/app/modules/file/file.controller.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/migrations/20240926131706-update-subpoena.js (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/formatters/subpoenaPdf.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/case.module.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/case.service.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/internalCase.service.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/limitedAccessCase.service.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/pdf.service.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/test/caseController/update.spec.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/defendant.controller.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/defendant.module.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/index.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/test/createTestingDefendantModule.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/guards/subpoenaExists.guard.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/index.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/internalSubpoena.controller.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/limitedAccessSubpoena.controller.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/models/subpoena.model.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/subpoena.controller.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/subpoena.module.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/subpoena.service.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/test/createTestingSubpoenaModule.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/test/limitedAccessSubpoenaController/getSubpoenaPdf.spec.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/test/limitedAccessSubpoenaController/getSubpoenaPdfRolesRules.spec.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/test/limitedAccessSubpoenaController/limitedAccessSubpoenaControllerGuards.spec.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/test/subpoenaController/getSubpoenaPdf.spec.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/test/subpoenaController/getSubpoenaPdfRolesRules.spec.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/test/subpoenaController/subpoenaControllerGuards.spec.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/message-handler/src/app/messageHandler.service.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/web/src/components/FormProvider/case.graphql (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/web/src/components/FormProvider/limitedAccessCase.graphql (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/web/src/components/IndictmentCaseFilesList/IndictmentCaseFilesList.strings.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/web/src/components/IndictmentCaseFilesList/IndictmentCaseFilesList.tsx (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/web/src/components/PdfButton/PdfButton.tsx (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Overview/Overview.tsx (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Subpoena/Subpoena.strings.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Subpoena/Subpoena.tsx (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/components/SubpoenaType/SubpoenaType.tsx (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
libs/judicial-system/message/src/lib/message.ts (1)
Pattern
libs/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- Reusability of components and hooks across different NextJS apps.
- TypeScript usage for defining props and exporting types.
- Effective tree-shaking and bundling practices."
📓 Learnings (1)
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/index.ts (1)
Learnt from: oddsson PR: island-is/island.is#16059 File: apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/defendant.module.ts:28-28 Timestamp: 2024-09-18T14:32:59.502Z Learning: Services should only be exported when they are needed by other modules.
🪛 Biome
apps/judicial-system/backend/migrations/20240926131706-update-subpoena.js
[error] 1-1: Redundant use strict directive.
The entire contents of JavaScript modules are automatically in strict mode, with no statement needed to initiate it.
Safe fix: Remove the redundant use strict directive.(lint/suspicious/noRedundantUseStrict)
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/guards/subpoenaExists.guard.ts
[error] 50-52: This constructor is unnecessary.
Unsafe fix: Remove the unnecessary constructor.
(lint/complexity/noUselessConstructor)
apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Subpoena/Subpoena.tsx
[error] 157-208: Missing key property for this element in iterable.
The order of the items may change, and having a key can help React identify which item was moved.
Check the React documentation.(lint/correctness/useJsxKeyInIterable)
🔇 Additional comments (89)
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/index.ts (1)
2-2: LGTM! Consider verifying the Subpoena model implementation.The export of the
Subpoenamodel follows TypeScript best practices. This approach allows for clear separation between the data model and the service logic.To ensure the
Subpoenamodel is properly implemented, you can run the following script:✅ Verification successful
Subpoena Model Implementation Verified
The
Subpoenamodel is properly implemented with necessary decorators and properties. The export follows TypeScript best practices and supports tree-shaking.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the Subpoena model implementation # Test: Check if Subpoena model exists and has properties ast-grep --lang typescript --pattern 'export class Subpoena { $$$ }' # Test: Look for common model decorators or type definitions rg --type typescript '(@Entity|@Column|type)' ./apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/models/subpoena.model.tsLength of output: 236
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Re-verify the Subpoena model implementation with corrected ripgrep command # Test: Check if Subpoena model exists and has properties ast-grep --lang typescript --pattern 'export class Subpoena { $$$ }' # Test: Look for common model decorators or type definitions rg '(@Entity|@Column|type)' ./apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/models/subpoena.model.ts -g "*.ts" -A 2Length of output: 1520
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/test/limitedAccessSubpoenaController/getSubpoenaPdfRolesRules.spec.ts (4)
4-4: LGTM! Test suite description updated correctly.The test suite description has been properly updated to reflect the new controller name, maintaining consistency with the renaming from
LimitedAccessDefendantControllertoLimitedAccessSubpoenaController.
Line range hint
1-19: Overall LGTM! Suggest comprehensive rename impact verification.The changes in this file consistently reflect the renaming of the controller from
LimitedAccessDefendantControllertoLimitedAccessSubpoenaController. The test structure and content adhere to NextJS best practices, and the modifications maintain the integrity of the test suite.To ensure the renaming has been consistently applied across the entire codebase, run the following comprehensive verification script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the comprehensive impact of the controller renaming across the codebase. echo "1. Checking for any remaining references to LimitedAccessDefendantController:" rg "LimitedAccessDefendantController" apps/judicial-system/backend echo "2. Verifying occurrences of LimitedAccessSubpoenaController:" rg "LimitedAccessSubpoenaController" apps/judicial-system/backend echo "3. Checking for any potential partial renames or inconsistencies:" rg -i "limitedaccess.*(defendant|subpoena)" apps/judicial-system/backend echo "4. Verifying import statements for the new controller:" rg "from '.*limitedAccessSubpoena.controller'" apps/judicial-system/backend echo "5. Checking for any TODO comments related to the rename:" rg -i "todo.*rename" apps/judicial-system/backendThis script will help ensure that the renaming has been consistently applied throughout the codebase and catch any potential oversights.
2-2: LGTM! Verify file structure for consistency.The import statement has been correctly updated to reflect the new controller name. This change is consistent with the renaming from
LimitedAccessDefendantControllertoLimitedAccessSubpoenaController.To ensure the file structure is consistent with this change, run the following script:
11-11: LGTM! Verify method name consistency across the codebase.The metadata retrieval has been correctly updated to use
LimitedAccessSubpoenaController.prototype.getSubpoenaPdf, which is consistent with the controller renaming.To ensure the method name
getSubpoenaPdfis consistently used across the codebase, run the following script:apps/judicial-system/api/src/app/modules/defendant/models/subpoena.model.ts (3)
1-4: LGTM: Imports and class definition are correct.The imports from '@nestjs/graphql' and the use of the @ObjectType() decorator are appropriate for defining a GraphQL object type. The file structure also adheres to NextJS best practices for API routes.
5-6: LGTM: 'id' field is correctly defined.The 'id' field is appropriately defined as a non-nullable ID type and marked as readonly, which ensures data integrity and follows GraphQL best practices for unique identifiers.
1-31: Overall structure adheres to TypeScript and NestJS best practices.The file demonstrates good use of TypeScript features and follows NestJS conventions for GraphQL object types. The structure is clean and well-organized.
However, there's room for improvement in type safety, as mentioned in previous comments. Implementing these suggestions would further enhance the robustness of the code.
While this file doesn't contain NextJS-specific code (being a backend model), it fits well within a NextJS project structure for API routes.
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/test/subpoenaController/getSubpoenaPdfRolesRules.spec.ts (3)
9-9: LGTM: Import statement updated correctly.The import statement has been properly updated to import
SubpoenaControllerinstead ofDefendantController, which aligns with the changes in the test focus.
11-11: LGTM: Test description updated appropriately.The test description has been correctly updated to reflect the focus on
SubpoenaControllerinstead ofDefendantController. This change maintains consistency with the new test purpose.
Line range hint
1-32: Summary: Changes are consistent and align with PR objectives.The modifications in this file successfully transition the test focus from
DefendantControllertoSubpoenaController, which aligns with the PR objective of introducing a new subpoena feature. The changes are consistent throughout the file, including imports, test descriptions, and metadata retrieval.Minor suggestions have been made to improve type safety and enhance test assertions, but these are not critical issues. Overall, the changes appear to be well-implemented and maintain the integrity of the test suite.
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/subpoena.module.ts (3)
Line range hint
1-28: Summary of SubpoenaModule changes.The modifications to the
SubpoenaModuleenhance its functionality by:
- Adding new controllers (
SubpoenaControllerandLimitedAccessSubpoenaController).- Exporting the
SubpoenaServicefor use in other modules.These changes follow NestJS best practices and improve the module's capabilities, likely supporting the new subpoena feature mentioned in the PR objectives. However, please address the inconsistency regarding the
DefendantModuleimport noted in the previous comment.
25-25: SubpoenaService export added.Exporting
SubpoenaServiceallows for its use in other modules, which can enhance code reuse and modularity. This change aligns with the expanded functionality suggested by the new controllers.To ensure the exported service is used appropriately and doesn't create circular dependencies, run the following script:
#!/bin/bash # Check for imports of SubpoenaService in other modules rg --type typescript "import.*SubpoenaService.*from.*subpoena\.module" apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules
9-10: New controller imports look good.The addition of
LimitedAccessSubpoenaControllerandSubpoenaControllerimports is consistent with the module's purpose and follows NestJS naming conventions.To ensure the new controller files exist, run the following script:
✅ Verification successful
To resolve the issues from the previous script, please execute the following corrected shell script to verify the existence of the new controller files:
New controller imports verified successfully.
The
LimitedAccessSubpoenaControllerandSubpoenaControllerfiles exist in the specified directory.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Verify the existence of new controller files fd -e ts -p "limitedAccessSubpoena.controller.ts|subpoena.controller.ts" apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoenaLength of output: 225
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Verify the existence of new controller files fd -e ts 'limitedAccessSubpoena\.controller\.ts|subpoena\.controller\.ts' apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoenaLength of output: 296
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/defendant.module.ts (2)
Line range hint
1-32: LGTM: Module structure and TypeScript usageThe overall structure of the
DefendantModuleremains intact and follows NestJS best practices. The use of TypeScript for type safety is appropriate and effective.
24-27: Confirm the removal ofLimitedAccessDefendantControllerThe
LimitedAccessDefendantControllerhas been removed from the list of controllers. This could potentially impact the limited access functionality for defendants.Please ensure this removal is intentional and doesn't break any existing features. Run the following script to check for any remaining references to the
LimitedAccessDefendantController:✅ Verification successful
Removal of
LimitedAccessDefendantControllerVerifiedThe
LimitedAccessDefendantControllerhas been successfully removed without any remaining references in the codebase. No issues detected.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for remaining references to the LimitedAccessDefendantController # Expected result: No occurrences of LimitedAccessDefendantController in other files rg --type typescript "import.*LimitedAccessDefendantController.*from" apps/judicial-system rg --type typescript "LimitedAccessDefendantController" apps/judicial-systemLength of output: 239
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for remaining references to the LimitedAccessDefendantController # Expected result: No occurrences of LimitedAccessDefendantController in other files rg "import.*LimitedAccessDefendantController.*from" apps/judicial-system rg "LimitedAccessDefendantController" apps/judicial-systemLength of output: 133
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/test/subpoenaController/subpoenaControllerGuards.spec.ts (4)
9-9: LGTM! Test suite title updated correctly.The describe block title has been appropriately updated to reflect the change from LimitedAccessDefendantController to SubpoenaController.
14-14: LGTM! Metadata retrieval updated correctly.The metadata retrieval has been correctly updated to use SubpoenaController, which is consistent with the refactoring of the test suite.
5-6: LGTM! Verify import paths across the project.The new imports look good and align with the refactoring from LimitedAccessDefendantController to SubpoenaController.
To ensure consistency, please run the following script to verify the import paths:
✅ Verification successful
Import paths verified and consistent across the project.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the import paths for DefendantExistsGuard and SubpoenaExistsOptionalGuard # Test: Search for DefendantExistsGuard imports echo "DefendantExistsGuard imports:" rg --type typescript "import.*DefendantExistsGuard.*from" # Test: Search for SubpoenaExistsOptionalGuard imports echo "SubpoenaExistsOptionalGuard imports:" rg --type typescript "import.*SubpoenaExistsOptionalGuard.*from"Length of output: 348
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the import paths for DefendantExistsGuard and SubpoenaExistsOptionalGuard # Test: Search for DefendantExistsGuard imports echo "DefendantExistsGuard imports:" rg "import.*DefendantExistsGuard.*from" -g "*.ts" # Test: Search for SubpoenaExistsOptionalGuard imports echo "SubpoenaExistsOptionalGuard imports:" rg "import.*SubpoenaExistsOptionalGuard.*from" -g "*.ts"Length of output: 2926
Line range hint
18-28: LGTM! Guard assertions updated correctly.The guard assertions have been properly updated to include the new SubpoenaExistsOptionalGuard while maintaining the existing guard checks. The increase in the number of expected guards from 6 to 7 is correct.
To ensure the guard order is consistent across the application, please run the following script:
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/test/limitedAccessSubpoenaController/limitedAccessSubpoenaControllerGuards.spec.ts (2)
1-7: LGTM: Imports are well-organized and relevant.The imports are logically structured, starting with external modules followed by internal modules. All imported entities are used in the test file, and they cover the necessary guards and components for testing the LimitedAccessSubpoenaController.
1-30: Overall: Well-structured and effective test file for guard configuration.This test file for the LimitedAccessSubpoenaController guards is well-implemented and aligns with NextJS best practices for backend testing. It effectively verifies the guard configuration, which is crucial for ensuring proper access control in the new subpoena feature.
The file structure, import organization, and test case implementation are all commendable. The suggested minor improvements (more specific typing for guards and refactoring the test case for better readability) would further enhance the quality of this already solid test file.
Great job on prioritizing security and access control testing for this new feature!
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/models/subpoena.model.ts (3)
72-74: LGTM:arraignmentDateproperty additionThe addition of the
arraignmentDateproperty is well-implemented. It's correctly defined as non-nullable in both TypeScript and the database schema, and the@ApiPropertydecorator is appropriately used for API documentation.
76-78: LGTM:locationproperty additionThe addition of the
locationproperty is well-implemented. It's correctly defined as non-nullable in both TypeScript and the database schema, and the@ApiPropertydecorator is appropriately used for API documentation.
Line range hint
1-78: Verify impact on related componentsThe changes to the
Subpoenamodel look good overall. However, please ensure that all components interacting with theSubpoenamodel (e.g., controllers, services, and frontend components) are updated to handle the new required properties (caseId,arraignmentDate, andlocation).To help verify this, you can run the following script to find potential areas that might need updates:
Please review the output of this script and make necessary adjustments to ensure all parts of the application are consistent with the updated
Subpoenamodel.apps/judicial-system/backend/migrations/20240926131706-update-subpoena.js (3)
42-60: Approvedownfunction implementationThe
downfunction correctly reverses the changes made in theupfunction. It removes the newly added columns and reverts thecase_idcolumn to its previous state. The use of a transaction ensures the atomicity of the rollback operation.
1-61: Approve overall implementation with testing reminderThe migration file is well-structured and correctly implements the required changes for the new subpoena feature. It follows Sequelize migration best practices and provides a proper rollback mechanism.
As per the PR checklist, please ensure that you've added tests to verify the effectiveness of these changes, particularly focusing on the new
arraignment_dateandlocationfields in the subpoena model and any related functionality.🧰 Tools
🪛 Biome
[error] 1-1: Redundant use strict directive.
The entire contents of JavaScript modules are automatically in strict mode, with no statement needed to initiate it.
Safe fix: Remove the redundant use strict directive.(lint/suspicious/noRedundantUseStrict)
4-40: Approve changes with a suggestion forarraignment_dateThe
upfunction correctly implements the required changes to thesubpoenatable. However, consider if usingCURRENT_TIMESTAMPas the default value forarraignment_dateis appropriate for all cases. It might be better to require this value to be explicitly set when creating a new subpoena.If you decide to keep the current implementation, please run the following script to verify that
arraignment_dateis being set correctly in the application code:apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/test/limitedAccessSubpoenaController/getSubpoenaPdf.spec.ts (5)
4-4: LGTM: Import statements updated correctlyThe import statements have been appropriately updated to reflect the shift from a defendant-centric approach to a subpoena-centric approach. The use of TypeScript for importing the
Subpoenatype is a good practice for maintaining type safety.Also applies to: 7-7
15-15: LGTM: Test suite description updatedThe test suite description has been correctly updated to reflect the new focus on the
LimitedAccessSubpoenaController. This change maintains clarity and accurately represents the purpose of the test suite.
28-29: LGTM: Module creation updatedThe change from
createTestingDefendantModuletocreateTestingSubpoenaModuleis consistent with the overall refactoring to a subpoena-centric approach. The destructuring ofpdfServiceandlimitedAccessSubpoenaControllerfrom the module creation is a good practice for clarity and maintainability.
65-65: LGTM: Test expectation updatedThe test expectation has been correctly updated to include the
subpoenain the arguments passed tomockPdfService.getSubpoenaPdf. This change ensures that the test accurately verifies the new behavior of passing the subpoena to the PDF service.
Line range hint
1-72: Overall: Well-structured refactoring to subpoena-centric approachThe file has been successfully refactored from a defendant-centric to a subpoena-centric approach, aligning well with the PR objectives. The changes are consistent throughout the file, and the use of TypeScript for type safety is commendable. The test structure follows good practices for unit testing in a NextJS environment.
Key points:
- Imports and module creation have been updated correctly.
- The test setup and expectations have been adjusted to focus on subpoenas.
- TypeScript is used effectively for type assertions and importing types.
The changes adhere to the coding guidelines, particularly in terms of NextJS best practices and TypeScript usage. While this file doesn't directly involve state management or server-side rendering, the structure supports efficient testing of these aspects in the actual implementation.
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/test/subpoenaController/getSubpoenaPdf.spec.ts (5)
4-4: LGTM: Import statements updated correctlyThe new import statements for
createTestingSubpoenaModuleandSubpoenamodel align well with the shift towards a subpoena-centric approach in this test file. This change demonstrates good module organization and maintains clear dependencies.Also applies to: 8-8
29-30: LGTM: Test setup correctly updatedThe changes in the beforeEach block, including the use of
createTestingSubpoenaModuleand the destructuring ofsubpoenaController, align well with the shift to a subpoena-centric approach. This demonstrates good separation of concerns in the test setup and maintains consistency with the new focus of the controller.
66-66: LGTM: Expectation updated correctlyThe addition of the
subpoenaparameter in themockPdfService.getSubpoenaPdfexpectation accurately reflects the changes made to the controller method. This ensures that the mock service is called with the correct parameters, maintaining the integrity of the test.
Line range hint
1-73: Overall assessment: Well-structured and consistent changesThe modifications to this test file successfully transition it from a defendant-centric to a subpoena-centric approach. The changes are consistent throughout the file, maintaining good TypeScript practices and test structure. The updated imports, variable declarations, test setup, and expectations all align well with the new focus on subpoenas.
A few minor suggestions were made to further improve type safety and ensure consistency with the controller implementation. Overall, the changes effectively represent the new subpoena functionality and maintain the integrity of the test suite.
40-43: LGTM: Controller method call updated correctlyThe changes to the controller method call, including the use of
subpoenaControllerand the addition ofsubpoenaIdandsubpoenaparameters, accurately reflect the updated controller structure and focus.To ensure consistency, please verify that the
getSubpoenaPdfmethod signature in theSubpoenaControllermatches these changes. Run the following script to check the method signature:Also applies to: 46-46
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/case.module.ts (1)
18-18: LGTM: SubpoenaModule import added correctlyThe addition of SubpoenaModule to the imports list is consistent with the module's structure and follows the existing import pattern. This change aligns with the PR objective of introducing a new subpoena feature.
apps/judicial-system/api/src/app/modules/defendant/models/defendant.model.ts (1)
11-11: LGTM: New import statement is correctly placed.The import of the
Subpoenamodel is appropriately added and follows good practices for modular code organization.To ensure the
Subpoenamodel is correctly defined, please run the following script:✅ Verification successful
Verification Successful:
Subpoenaclass is present.The
subpoena.model.tsfile exists and correctly exports theSubpoenaclass as expected. The import statement indefendant.model.tsis valid and follows best practices.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the existence and content of the subpoena.model.ts file # Test: Check if the file exists and contains a Subpoena class rg --type typescript -e "export class Subpoena" apps/judicial-system/api/src/app/modules/defendant/models/subpoena.model.tsLength of output: 160
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the existence and content of the subpoena.model.ts file # Test: Check if the file exists and contains a Subpoena class rg -g '*.ts' -e 'export class Subpoena' apps/judicial-system/api/src/app/modules/defendant/models/subpoena.model.tsLength of output: 141
apps/judicial-system/web/src/components/PdfButton/PdfButton.tsx (2)
25-25: Approved: Enhanced flexibility with union type forelementIdThe change from
stringtostring | string[]for theelementIdproperty is a good improvement. It allows the component to handle both single and multiple identifiers, increasing its flexibility and reusability. This is a non-breaking change and follows TypeScript best practices for type definitions.
Line range hint
1-101: Approved: Well-structured component adhering to NextJS and TypeScript best practicesThe
PdfButtoncomponent is well-implemented, adhering to NextJS and React best practices:
- It uses functional component syntax with TypeScript for better type safety.
- Props are properly typed using an interface, enhancing maintainability.
- React hooks (useContext) are used correctly.
- The component is modular and reusable, promoting code efficiency.
- The file structure follows NextJS conventions.
The recent changes have improved the component's flexibility without compromising its adherence to best practices.
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/test/createTestingDefendantModule.ts (2)
13-19: LGTM: Import changes align with module updatesThe changes in imports, including the removal of PdfService and the addition of CaseService, CourtService, and UserService, are consistent with the evolving requirements of the testing module. These modifications align well with the changes described in the AI-generated summary.
Line range hint
80-89: LGTM: Return object updates are consistentThe changes in the return object of the
createTestingDefendantModulefunction, specifically the removal ofpdfServiceandlimitedAccessDefendantController, are consistent with the earlier modifications in imports and module setup. The return object continues to provide all necessary services and controllers for testing while maintaining good TypeScript usage for type safety.To ensure that these changes don't have unintended consequences, please verify that all tests using this module have been updated accordingly. Run the following script to check for any remaining references to the removed services:
If this script returns any results, those test files may need to be updated to reflect the changes made in this module.
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/internalSubpoena.controller.ts (2)
Line range hint
23-33: LGTM: Import changes align with new subpoena featureThe new imports (
CurrentSubpoena,SubpoenaExistsGuard,Subpoena) and the removal ofPdfServiceare consistent with the PR's objective of introducing a new subpoena feature. These changes suggest a shift from PDF handling to direct subpoena object management, which is a good practice for better type safety and modularity.
Line range hint
38-41: LGTM: Constructor simplifiedThe removal of the
pdfServiceparameter from the constructor is consistent with the earlier changes. This simplification keeps the controller focused on its core responsibilities and adheres to the principle of dependency injection. Good job on maintaining a clean and focused controller.apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/test/createTestingSubpoenaModule.ts (3)
1-27: LGTM: Imports and mocks are well-structuredThe imports and mocks are appropriately set up for a testing module. The use of Jest for mocking services is a good practice for unit testing, ensuring isolation of the subpoena module from its dependencies.
78-97: LGTM: Efficient retrieval of service and controller instancesThe code efficiently retrieves instances of services and controllers from the compiled module. The use of TypeScript generics ensures type safety, which aligns with the requirement for optimal use of TypeScript in the coding guidelines.
1-110: Great implementation of the Subpoena testing moduleThis file successfully implements a comprehensive testing module for the new Subpoena feature, aligning well with the PR objectives. The code demonstrates adherence to NextJS and NestJS best practices, including proper file structure and efficient use of the testing framework. The implementation makes optimal use of TypeScript for type safety, as required by the coding guidelines.
The testing module provides a solid foundation for unit testing the Subpoena feature, with proper mocking of dependencies and isolation of the module under test. This approach will facilitate thorough testing of the new feature, contributing to the overall quality and reliability of the judicial system application.
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/defendant.controller.ts (2)
Line range hint
1-132: TypeScript usage is appropriate and effective.The file demonstrates good use of TypeScript features:
- Types are well-defined for method parameters and return values.
- Decorators are used effectively, which is typical in NestJS applications.
- The overall structure leverages TypeScript's capabilities to enhance code quality and maintainability.
Line range hint
44-47: PDF functionality removed, consider updating documentation.The removal of the
pdfServicedependency and thegetSubpoenaPdfmethod indicates that PDF generation functionality has been moved or removed from this controller. This change simplifies the controller's responsibilities.To ensure consistency across the codebase:
Also, please ensure that any related documentation or API specifications are updated to reflect this change in functionality.
✅ Verification successful
PDF functionality successfully removed. No remaining PDF-related references found in the
DefendantController.
Please ensure that all related documentation is updated to reflect these changes.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check for any remaining references to PDF functionality in this file or related files rg -i 'pdf|subpoena' apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendantLength of output: 1524
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Trace all implementations and usages of 'Subpoena' within the defendant module rg -C 3 'Subpoena' apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendantLength of output: 3991
libs/judicial-system/message/src/lib/message.ts (1)
69-69: Approved: Enhanced flexibility forelementId. Consider adding documentation.The change to allow
elementIdto be either a string or an array of strings enhances the flexibility of theMessagetype, which is good for reusability across different NextJS apps.Consider adding a comment to explain the usage of
elementId, for example:/** * The ID(s) of the element(s) associated with this message. * Can be a single string for one element or an array of strings for multiple elements. */ elementId?: string | string[]It's important to verify that this change doesn't break existing code. Please run the following script to check for potential issues:
If the script returns results, those locations may need to be updated to handle both string and array cases.
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/formatters/subpoenaPdf.ts (5)
10-10: LGTM: New imports added correctlyThe new imports for
SubpoenaTypeandSubpoenaare correctly added and follow TypeScript best practices by explicitly importing types.Also applies to: 16-16
54-56: LGTM: Conditional formatting addedThe addition of empty lines when a subpoena is present is a minor formatting change that doesn't affect core functionality.
60-63: LGTM: Improved date handlingThe date formatting now correctly uses the
subpoena.createdproperty when available, falling back tonowFactory(). The use of the nullish coalescing operator (??) is a good TypeScript practice.
66-68: LGTM: Flexible value assignmentThe code now correctly uses the
subpoenaobject properties if available, falling back to the function parameters. This change allows for more flexibility in setting these values, and the use of the nullish coalescing operator (??) is consistent with TypeScript best practices.
Line range hint
1-173: Overall: Well-implemented changes improving subpoena creation flexibilityThe modifications to the
createSubpoenafunction significantly improve its flexibility by introducing an optionalSubpoenaobject. The changes are consistent with the AI-generated summary and follow TypeScript best practices. The code now handles various scenarios more gracefully, whether aSubpoenaobject is provided or not.Key improvements:
- Addition of new optional parameters to the function signature.
- Flexible assignment of arraignment date, location, and subpoena type.
- Conditional addition of a confirmation footer.
- Improved date handling using the
subpoena.createdproperty when available.These changes enhance the reusability and maintainability of the code while adhering to NextJS and TypeScript best practices.
apps/judicial-system/api/src/app/modules/file/file.controller.ts (3)
180-191: Improved flexibility with optional parametersThe changes to the
getSubpoenaPdfmethod signature and URL patterns enhance the API's flexibility. The method now supports bothsubpoena/:defendantIdandsubpoena/:defendantId/:subpoenaIdroutes, allowing for optionalsubpoenaId. Additionally, makingarraignmentDate,location, andsubpoenaTypeoptional query parameters improves the versatility of the API.These changes align well with TypeScript best practices by utilizing optional parameters. The method signature is now more expressive and type-safe.
197-206: Enhanced dynamic URL constructionThe new logic for constructing the file service request URL is more robust and handles optional parameters effectively. The use of template literals and conditional injections (
subpoenaIdInjectionandqueryInjection) creates a clean and readable solution.This approach ensures that the URL is correctly formed regardless of whether
subpoenaIdor query parameters are provided, improving the method's flexibility and maintainability.
180-206: Overall improvement in subpoena handlingThe changes to the
getSubpoenaPdfmethod significantly enhance its flexibility and usability. By supporting an optionalsubpoenaIdand making query parameters optional, the API can now handle a wider range of subpoena-related requests. The updated URL construction logic ensures that these new options are handled correctly.These modifications align well with NextJS best practices for API routes and make effective use of TypeScript's type system. The changes are focused and don't introduce any apparent issues to the existing codebase.
apps/judicial-system/web/src/components/FormProvider/case.graphql (1)
29-32: LGTM! Consider updating related TypeScript types.The addition of the
subpoenasfield to thedefendantsobject is well-structured and aligns with the PR objectives. The field follows GraphQL best practices with clear naming and appropriate use of scalar types.As a follow-up action, please ensure that any related TypeScript interfaces or types (e.g., for Case or Defendant) are updated to include this new field. Run the following script to identify potential files that may need updates:
Review the output and update the relevant TypeScript definitions to include the new
subpoenasfield.apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Overview/Overview.tsx (2)
41-41: Good addition of a descriptive boolean constant.The introduction of
isArraignmentScheduledimproves code readability and follows TypeScript best practices. The use ofBoolean()ensures a true boolean value, which is a good practice.
Line range hint
1-172: Excellent adherence to NextJS and TypeScript best practices.The changes maintain the file structure and coding practices consistent with NextJS conventions. The use of TypeScript throughout the file, including the recent changes, ensures type safety and improves code maintainability. The component efficiently manages state using React hooks and follows NextJS routing practices.
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/pdf.service.ts (1)
36-36: LGTM: Import statement for Subpoena type.The import statement for the
Subpoenatype is correctly placed and necessary for the changes in thegetSubpoenaPdfmethod.apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/internalCase.service.ts (4)
Line range hint
1042-1073: LGTM! Comprehensive indictment case retrieval.The
getIndictmentCasefunction is well-implemented. It efficiently retrieves an indictment case along with its related data, including defendants, subpoenas, court, prosecutor's office, judge, prosecutor, and date logs. The error handling for a non-existent case is appropriate.
Line range hint
1075-1084: LGTM! Efficient indictment counting.The
countIndictmentsWaitingForConfirmationfunction is well-implemented. It efficiently counts indictments in the 'WAITING_FOR_CONFIRMATION' state for a specific prosecutor's office. The query is correctly structured with appropriate filters.
Line range hint
1-1084: Overall assessment: Code changes look good.The modifications in this file, particularly the import change for the
Subpoenamodel and the implementation ofgetIndictmentCaseandcountIndictmentsWaitingForConfirmationfunctions, are well-executed. These changes seem to be part of a larger feature addition or refactoring related to subpoenas. The code maintains good practices in terms of error handling, query structuring, and function naming.
61-61: LGTM! Verify import change impact.The import statement for the
Subpoenamodel has been simplified. This change looks good, but ensure that it doesn't affect how theSubpoenamodel is used throughout this file.✅ Verification successful
Import change verified and appears safe.
The simplified import statement for the
Subpoenamodel is correctly referencing the model, and its usages within the file remain unaffected.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for any usage of Subpoena in this file that might be affected by the import change. rg --type typescript "Subpoena" apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/internalCase.service.tsLength of output: 140
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Retry checking for any usage of Subpoena in TypeScript files with corrected file type. rg --type ts "Subpoena" apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/internalCase.service.tsLength of output: 167
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/guards/subpoenaExists.guard.ts (1)
37-39: Avoid exposing sensitive information in error messagesThe error message includes
defendant.id, which may contain sensitive information. To prevent potential PII leakage, consider omittingdefendant.idfrom the error message.[security]
Apply this diff to modify the error message:
throw new BadRequestException( - `Subpoena ${subpoenaId} of defendant ${defendant.id} does not exist`, + `Subpoena ${subpoenaId} does not exist for the specified defendant`, )apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/limitedAccessSubpoena.controller.ts (2)
79-81: Confirm Logging Message Handles UndefinedsubpoenaIdCorrectlyThe logging statement uses
subpoenaId ?? 'draft', which substitutes'draft'whensubpoenaIdisundefined. Please confirm that this meets the requirements for logging and that it provides sufficient information for debugging purposes.
50-50: Verify the Usage ofSubpoenaExistsOptionalGuardPlease verify that the inclusion of
SubpoenaExistsOptionalGuardin the@UseGuardsarray aligns with the intended behavior of the controller. Ensure that this guard appropriately handles scenarios when a subpoena may not exist and that downstream logic accounts for this possibility.Run the following script to check for consistent usage of
SubpoenaExistsOptionalGuardacross the codebase:apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/subpoena.controller.ts (1)
1-110:⚠️ Potential issueInconsistency between coding guidelines and project structure
The coding guidelines specify NextJS best practices for files matching the pattern
apps/**/*. However, this file is part of a NestJS backend application. Please ensure that the appropriate coding guidelines for NestJS are applied to this code segment to maintain consistency and adhere to best practices for the framework in use.⛔ Skipped due to learnings
Learnt from: unakb PR: island-is/island.is#16132 File: apps/judicial-system/digital-mailbox-api/src/app/modules/cases/models/subpoena.response.ts:79-80 Timestamp: 2024-09-24T11:31:03.418Z Learning: Subpoenas are already ordered by date in the backend.apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/components/SubpoenaType/SubpoenaType.tsx (3)
20-24: Good implementation of extendedsubpoenaItemstypeThe updated
subpoenaItemstype adds flexibility by allowing additional properties (disabledandchildren) per item. This enhances the component's capability to handle more complex scenarios.
Line range hint
1-107: Adherence to NextJS and TypeScript best practicesThe component follows React and TypeScript best practices, utilizing functional components and proper typing. Ensure that it integrates smoothly within the NextJS framework, especially with regards to server-side rendering and static generation if applicable.
42-106: Verify state updates with the newsubpoenaItemsstructureEnsure that the
updateDefendantStatefunction and any related state management accommodate the changes tosubpoenaItemsand properly update the state based on the new data structure.Run the following script to check for usages of
updateDefendantState:✅ Verification successful
State updates correctly handle the new
subpoenaItemsstructureThe
updateDefendantStatefunction is properly implemented across all relevant files and accommodates the changes tosubpoenaItems, ensuring that state updates function as expected.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify that all calls to updateDefendantState handle the new structure. # Search for all usages of updateDefendantState in TypeScript files. rg --type ts 'updateDefendantState' -A 5 -B 5Length of output: 42564
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Find the definition of updateDefendantState to verify its implementation. # Search for the definition of updateDefendantState in TypeScript files. rg --type ts 'const updateDefendantState\s*='Length of output: 419
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Extract the definitions of updateDefendantState from identified TypeScript files. files=( "apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Prosecutor/RestrictionCase/Defendant/Defendant.tsx" "apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Prosecutor/InvestigationCase/Defendant/Defendant.tsx" "apps/judicial-system/web/src/utils/hooks/useDefendants/index.ts" ) for file in "${files[@]}"; do echo "=== Extracting updateDefendantState from $file ===" rg --type ts 'const updateDefendantState\s*=' "$file" -C 10 echo "" doneLength of output: 3553
apps/judicial-system/web/src/components/IndictmentCaseFilesList/IndictmentCaseFilesList.tsx (1)
76-78: LGTMThe implementation correctly checks if any defendant has subpoenas associated with them. The use of optional chaining and the
somemethod ensures safe and efficient evaluation.apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Subpoena/Subpoena.tsx (1)
33-33: State management enhancement approvedThe addition of the
newSubpoenasstate variable usinguseState<string[]>([])appropriately handles the tracking of new subpoenas.apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/limitedAccessCase.service.ts (2)
41-41: Approved: ImportingSubpoenamodelThe
Subpoenamodel is correctly imported and ready for use.
174-189: Verify ordering behavior when usingseparate: trueWhen
separate: trueis used in includes, theorderclause within the include may not be applied as expected. This can lead to the included models not being ordered correctly. Verify that the defendants and subpoenas are ordered as intended in the fetched data.apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/test/caseController/update.spec.ts (2)
884-887: Verify the Structure of 'defendants' with 'subpoenas'The
updatedCaseobject now includes adefendantsarray with each defendant having asubpoenasarray. Ensure that this structure aligns with the expected data model and that all related functionality correctly handles this nested data.
910-921: Validate Message Queue ParametersIn the test assertion,
elementIdis set as an array[defendantId1, subpoenaId1]and[defendantId2, subpoenaId2]. Confirm that thesendMessagesToQueuefunction expectselementIdto be an array in this format and that this change is consistent with the updated messaging logic.apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/case.service.ts (8)
65-65: Importing Subpoena and SubpoenaService is appropriateThe new feature requires the use of
SubpoenaandSubpoenaService, and importing them here is necessary.
430-430: Injecting SubpoenaService is appropriateThe
subpoenaServiceis needed for handling subpoenas, and injecting it here follows good dependency injection practices.
1176-1199: New methodaddMessagesForNewSubpoenasToQueueis implemented correctlyThe method appropriately identifies defendants with new subpoenas and sends messages accordingly. The use of optional chaining prevents errors due to undefined values.
1376-1379: Adding the call toaddMessagesForNewSubpoenasToQueueis appropriateIncluding this call ensures that messages are sent when new subpoenas are created due to scheduling a new arraignment date.
1658-1669: New condition variables are defined correctlyThe variables
completingIndictmentCaseWithoutRulingandschedulingNewArraignmentDateForIndictmentCaseare correctly defined to capture the required conditions.
1686-1701: Properly handling the result of the update operationThe code correctly checks the number of affected rows after the update operation and handles unexpected cases appropriately by logging or throwing an exception.
1727-1738: Correctly deleting ruling files when completing indictment case without rulingThe code appropriately deletes ruling files when an indictment case is completed without a ruling, ensuring no incorrect files remain associated with the case.
1740-1754: Creating new subpoenas when scheduling a new arraignment dateThe code correctly creates new subpoenas for each defendant when a new arraignment date is scheduled for an indictment case.
apps/judicial-system/api/src/app/modules/defendant/models/subpoena.model.ts
Show resolved
Hide resolved
apps/judicial-system/api/src/app/modules/defendant/models/subpoena.model.ts
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/defendant.module.ts
Show resolved
Hide resolved
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/models/subpoena.model.ts
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
apps/judicial-system/web/src/components/IndictmentCaseFilesList/IndictmentCaseFilesList.tsx
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Subpoena/Subpoena.tsx
Show resolved
Hide resolved
apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Subpoena/Subpoena.tsx
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Subpoena/Subpoena.tsx
Show resolved
Hide resolved
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/limitedAccessCase.service.ts
Show resolved
Hide resolved
apps/judicial-system/api/src/app/modules/defendant/models/subpoena.model.ts
Show resolved
Hide resolved
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/limitedAccessCase.service.ts
Show resolved
Hide resolved
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/limitedAccessCase.service.ts
Show resolved
Hide resolved
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/internalSubpoena.controller.ts
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/models/subpoena.model.ts (1)
Line range hint
1-78: Overall, excellent improvements to the Subpoena model.The changes to this file enhance the Subpoena model with additional necessary fields (
arraignmentDateandlocation) and improve type correctness (acknowledgedas boolean). All modifications adhere to NextJS best practices and make good use of TypeScript for type safety.As these changes modify the Subpoena model structure, ensure that:
- Any components or services interacting with Subpoena instances are updated to handle the new properties.
- API endpoints that create or update Subpoena instances validate the new required fields.
- The frontend is updated to display and handle the new information (arraignment date and location).
- Any existing unit or integration tests are updated to include the new properties.
Consider running a search for usages of the Subpoena model throughout the codebase to identify areas that might need updates:
#!/bin/bash # Search for Subpoena usages in TypeScript files rg --type typescript 'Subpoena'This will help ensure that the changes are consistently applied across the application.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (3)
- apps/judicial-system/api/src/app/modules/defendant/models/subpoena.model.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/case.service.ts (8 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/models/subpoena.model.ts (2 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)
- apps/judicial-system/api/src/app/modules/defendant/models/subpoena.model.ts
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/case.service.ts
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (1)
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/models/subpoena.model.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
📓 Learnings (1)
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/models/subpoena.model.ts (1)
Learnt from: gudjong PR: island-is/island.is#16168 File: apps/judicial-system/api/src/app/modules/defendant/models/subpoena.model.ts:14-30 Timestamp: 2024-09-30T08:07:12.456Z Learning: In the Subpoena model, fields other than `acknowledged` are intended to be of type `string`.
🔇 Additional comments (4)
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/models/subpoena.model.ts (4)
52-54: LGTM! Implemented past suggestion correctly.The changes to the
caseIdproperty are well-implemented. You've correctly addedallowNull: falseto the@Columndecorator and marked the property as non-nullable in TypeScript. This ensures consistency between the TypeScript type and the database schema, addressing the concern raised in the previous review.
72-74: LGTM! Well-defined new property.The addition of the
arraignmentDateproperty is well-implemented. It's correctly defined as a non-nullable Date type in both TypeScript and the database schema. The use of@ApiPropertyfor API documentation is appropriate for this required field.
76-78: LGTM! Well-defined new property.The addition of the
locationproperty is well-implemented. It's correctly defined as a non-nullable string type in both TypeScript and the database schema. The use of@ApiPropertyfor API documentation is appropriate for this required field. This implementation aligns with the learning note about fields other than 'acknowledged' being of type string.
62-62: LGTM! Consider updating the learning note.The change of the
acknowledgedproperty fromstringtobooleanis a good improvement. It's more appropriate for representing an acknowledgment status. This change aligns with the learning note that states fields other than 'acknowledged' should be of type string.To ensure consistency, let's verify if there are any other occurrences of
acknowledgedas a string type:Also, consider updating the learning note to reflect this change explicitly.
✅ Verification successful
Verification passed!
No other instances of the
acknowledgedproperty use thestringtype. The change tobooleanis consistently applied across the codebase. Please proceed with updating the learning note.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for 'acknowledged' property declarations rg --type typescript 'acknowledged.*:.*string' -g '!**/subpoena.model.ts'Length of output: 110
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for 'acknowledged' property declarations with type 'string' excluding subpoena.model.ts rg 'acknowledged\s*:\s*string' -g '*.ts' -g '!**/subpoena.model.ts'Length of output: 69
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (4)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/internalSubpoena.controller.ts (3 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/web/src/components/IndictmentCaseFilesList/IndictmentCaseFilesList.tsx (3 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Subpoena/Subpoena.tsx (7 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/components/SubpoenaType/SubpoenaType.tsx (3 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (3)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/internalSubpoena.controller.ts
- apps/judicial-system/web/src/components/IndictmentCaseFilesList/IndictmentCaseFilesList.tsx
- apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/components/SubpoenaType/SubpoenaType.tsx
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (1)
apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Subpoena/Subpoena.tsx (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
🪛 Biome
apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Subpoena/Subpoena.tsx
[error] 158-203: Missing key property for this element in iterable.
The order of the items may change, and having a key can help React identify which item was moved.
Check the React documentation.(lint/correctness/useJsxKeyInIterable)
🔇 Additional comments (1)
apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Subpoena/Subpoena.tsx (1)
Line range hint
1-213: Overall code changes are well-implementedThe code changes align with the PR objectives and adhere to the project's coding guidelines. The use of React hooks for state management is appropriate, and TypeScript types are utilized effectively for component and utility type safety.
🧰 Tools
🪛 Biome
[error] 158-203: Missing key property for this element in iterable.
The order of the items may change, and having a key can help React identify which item was moved.
Check the React documentation.(lint/correctness/useJsxKeyInIterable)
apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Subpoena/Subpoena.tsx
Show resolved
Hide resolved
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (3)
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/test/subpoenaController/getSubpoenaPdf.spec.ts (3)
16-16: LGTM: Test setup updated correctly with a minor suggestionThe test description and variable declarations have been appropriately updated to reflect the focus on SubpoenaController and Subpoena model.
However, consider using type guards or constructors instead of type assertions (e.g.,
as Subpoena) for better type safety. For example:const subpoena: Subpoena = { id: subpoenaId }; const defendant: Defendant = { id: defendantId, subpoenas: [subpoena] };This approach provides better type checking at compile-time.
Also applies to: 18-19, 21-21
40-43: LGTM: Controller method call updated correctly with a suggestion for improvementThe method call has been correctly updated to use subpoenaController.getSubpoenaPdf with the new required parameters.
However, consider using an object with named parameters for better readability and maintainability, especially given the high number of parameters. For example:
await subpoenaController.getSubpoenaPdf({ caseId, defendantId, subpoenaId, case: theCase, defendant, res, subpoena, });This approach would make the function call more self-documenting and easier to modify in the future.
Also applies to: 47-47
66-66: LGTM: Expect statement correctly updatedThe expect statement has been appropriately updated to include the subpoena parameter in the call to mockPdfService.getSubpoenaPdf.
Consider adding a comment or using more descriptive variable names for the undefined parameters to improve clarity. For example:
expect(mockPdfService.getSubpoenaPdf).toHaveBeenCalledWith( theCase, defendant, subpoena, undefined, // optionalParam1 undefined, // optionalParam2 undefined, // optionalParam3 );This would make the purpose of these parameters more clear to other developers.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/test/subpoenaController/getSubpoenaPdf.spec.ts (3 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (1)
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/test/subpoenaController/getSubpoenaPdf.spec.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
🔇 Additional comments (2)
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/test/subpoenaController/getSubpoenaPdf.spec.ts (2)
4-4: LGTM: Import statements updated correctlyThe import statements have been appropriately updated to reflect the shift from LimitedAccessDefendant to Subpoena. The specific imports for createTestingSubpoenaModule and the Subpoena model align well with TypeScript best practices.
Also applies to: 7-8
29-30: LGTM: Test setup correctly updatedThe beforeEach setup has been appropriately updated to use createTestingSubpoenaModule and destructure subpoenaController. This change aligns well with the shift in focus to the Subpoena model and maintains good TypeScript practices.
oddsson
added
automerge
* Locks subpoena fields when arraignment date has been set * Move arraignment date message handling to the server side * Updates tests and fixes date comparison * Schedules new subpoenas * Enforces operation ordering * Only sends query parameters with new subpoena requests * Supports multiple subpoenas per defendant * Updates unit tests * Updates unit test * Fixes some typs and null reference guards * Improved type declaration * Improved date formatting * Improves indexing * Fixes spelling * Fixes indexing * Fixes optional arguments * Removes redundant constructor * Fix tests --------- Co-authored-by: kodiakhq[bot] <49736102+kodiakhq[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Ívar Oddsson <ivaroddsson@gmail.com>
New Subpoena
Nýtt fyrirkall
What
Why
Screenshots / Gifs
Screen.Recording.2024-09-27.at.19.34.47.mov
Checklist:
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Subpoenamodel to enhance the representation of subpoenas in the system.subpoenasfield to theDefendantclass for associating multiple subpoenas.getSubpoenaPdfmethod to support flexible URL patterns and optional query parameters.SubpoenaControllerfor handling subpoena-related requests.SubpoenaExistsGuardandSubpoenaExistsOptionalGuardto manage subpoena existence checks.Bug Fixes
DefendantControllerby removing outdated PDF generation functionality.Refactor
CaseServiceto manage subpoena-related messages and streamline case updates.DefendantControllerby removing unnecessary dependencies and methods.Subpoenamodel to enforce required fields and improve data integrity.Chores