Skip to content

Remove fraud review pending and rejection fields#8294

Merged
kbighorse merged 11 commits intomainfrom
lg-9400-remove-fraud-review-rejection-booleans
May 1, 2023
Merged

Remove fraud review pending and rejection fields#8294
kbighorse merged 11 commits intomainfrom
lg-9400-remove-fraud-review-rejection-booleans

Conversation

@kbighorse
Copy link
Contributor

@kbighorse kbighorse commented Apr 27, 2023

changelog: Identity Verification, Internal, Remove unused fraud state fields

🎫 Ticket

https://cm-jira.usa.gov/browse/LG-9400

🛠 Summary of changes

This PR ignores and removes fraud_review_pending and fraud_rejection boolean columns in the application code. Columns will be removed from the database in a subsequent PR.

Data was backfilled by #8237
Blocking database columns drop

@kbighorse kbighorse requested review from zachmargolis and removed request for eric-gade and theabrad April 27, 2023 21:18
Copy link
Contributor

@soniaconnolly soniaconnolly left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good in terms of catching where the columns are used. See comment about specs.

Has the backfill been done on the timestamp columns?

Comment on lines +407 to +408
expect(profile.fraud_review_pending?)
expect(profile.fraud_rejection?)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This syntax was surprising to me, so I tried it out. Rspec doesn't check the result at all, since profile.fraud_rejection? returns false and the test passes. This needs to change in all the other tests with similar syntax too.

Suggested change
expect(profile.fraud_review_pending?)
expect(profile.fraud_rejection?)
expect(profile.fraud_review_pending?).to eq(true)
expect(profile.fraud_rejection?).to eq(false)

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Whoa good catch thanks!

@kbighorse
Copy link
Contributor Author

Yes the backfill was performed previously. I will link it in the description.

Copy link
Contributor

@theabrad theabrad left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@kbighorse kbighorse merged commit 679d32e into main May 1, 2023
@kbighorse kbighorse deleted the lg-9400-remove-fraud-review-rejection-booleans branch May 1, 2023 16:29
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants