Asset Archive Feature

[alejandrosaenz117]

Pull Request

Fixes #167

Type of change

• A new feature
• A bug fix
• Documentation only changes
• Changes that do not affect the meaning of the code (white-space, formatting, missing semi-colons, etc)
• A code change that neither fixes a bug nor adds a feature
• A code change that improves performance
• Adding missing tests or correcting existing tests
• Changes that affect the build system or external dependencies
• Changes to our CI configuration files and scripts
• Other changes that don't modify src or test files

This pull request allows the user to archive assets so that it can be removed from active assets.

---

Checklist

• My code follows the contributing guidelines of this project
• I have performed a self-review of my own code
• I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
• I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
• My changes generate no new warnings
• I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
• New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
• Any dependent changes have been merged and published in downstream modules

[alejandrosaenz117]

@DarrellRichards With this pull-request, I have managed to stabilize the unit test infrastructure with Sqlite3. I have added dynamic column options so that that databases are isolated. I have also introduced the node env test which jest will only use. Please review the test within this PR if you're free. Thanks!

[DarrellRichards]

@Whamo12

This LGTM 🚀 🎸

I like the usage of the sqlite3 and mock-express's request & responses instead of the customs ones we started out with.

I ran the test and seeing about 52% line coverage on asset.controller.ts, everything was passing.

[alejandrosaenz117]

I ran the test and seeing about 52% line coverage on asset.controller.ts, everything was passing.

We have an existing issue for the asset controller and the remainder of the tests will be finished there.

Thanks for the review. A lot of unknowns in regard to the backend unit tests were resolved here which makes me happy.

[DarrellRichards]

I ran the test and seeing about 52% line coverage on asset.controller.ts, everything was passing.

We have an existing issue for the asset controller and the remainder of the tests will be finished there.

Thanks for the review. A lot of unknowns in regard to the backend unit tests were resolved here which makes me happy.

Understood, just wanted to make sure I wasn't missing something.

I'm glad everything is coming together so nicely.

Hopefully, I'll have some time upcoming to help the unit testing integration.