🐛 Business services: Fix create/edit when owner is included #1418
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
The `owner` field on the `BusinessService` payload needs to be a pure
`Ref` object or it will be rejected by the REST API call. Adopt the
same set of data transforms used in the application-form to handle
getting the correct set of data.
Related changes:
- Business service related REST API functions updated to have the
correct response types
- Business service queries updated to pass REST API response and
input values to `onSuccess()` and `onError()` handlers
- `BusinessServiceForm` updated to use mutation response data to
display the name of the business service in success messages
- Refactored `business-service-form.tsx` to move all data
access/mutation code to hook `useApplicationFormData() to logically
divide concerns (data access v. UI handling)
Resolves: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/MTA-1346
Signed-off-by: Scott J Dickerson <sdickers@redhat.com>
Codecov ReportAttention:
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1418 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 41.24% 41.25%
=======================================
Files 138 138
Lines 4347 4349 +2
Branches 1005 1005
=======================================
+ Hits 1793 1794 +1
- Misses 2542 2543 +1
Partials 12 12
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
ibolton336
approved these changes
Sep 29, 2023
ibolton336
reviewed
Sep 29, 2023
| obj: BusinessService | ||
| ): Promise<BusinessService> => axios.put(`${BUSINESS_SERVICES}/${obj.id}`, obj); | ||
| export const updateBusinessService = (obj: BusinessService) => | ||
| axios.put<void>(`${BUSINESS_SERVICES}/${obj.id}`, obj); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I like the void callout here. Not sure why we were pretending to get something useful back before.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'll be revisiting all of the rest functions soon in a similar way.
|
Tested and LGTM! |
This was referenced Nov 22, 2023
This was referenced Jan 23, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The
ownerfield on theBusinessServicepayload needs to be a pureRefobject or it will be rejected by the REST API call. Adopt the same set of data transforms used in the application-form to handle getting the correct set of data.Related changes:
Business services related REST API functions updated to have the correct response types
Business services queries updated to pass REST API response and input values to
onSuccess()andonError()handlersBusinessServiceFormupdated to use mutation response data to display the name of the business service in success messagesRefactored
business-service-form.tsxto move all data access/mutation code to hook `useApplicationFormData() to logically divide concerns (data access v. UI handling)Resolves: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/MTA-1346