Don't notify Sentry when specialist document is missing finder #2015
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
Fixes https://sentry.io/organizations/govuk/issues/1870942805/events/latest/?project=202226 This code was initially added in 9f39d88, around 4 years ago, seemingly just being cautious. There's no evidence it has highlighted any useful problems for us, and recently the check has become problematic as departments often publish documents first before making the finder live. The link would be there in Publishing API, but Publishing API wouldn't know how to expand it yet as the finder itself isn't live, so nothing matches its `content_id`.
thomasleese
approved these changes
Feb 12, 2021
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Fixes https://sentry.io/organizations/govuk/issues/1870942805/events/latest/?project=202226
This code was initially added in 9f39d88,
around 4 years ago, seemingly just being cautious. There's no
evidence it has highlighted any useful problems for us, and
recently the check has become problematic as departments often
publish documents first before making the finder live.
The link would be there in Publishing API, but Publishing API
wouldn't know how to expand it yet as the finder itself isn't
live, so nothing matches its
content_id.