Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

fix: point menu item for editoral stream to rswg documents #5206

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Feb 27, 2023

Conversation

rjsparks
Copy link
Member

@rjsparks rjsparks commented Feb 24, 2023

fixes #5203

Copy link
Member

@jennifer-richards jennifer-richards left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Not certain, but I think there's an unused factory call - suggest dropping that or, better, testing that the forwarding actually hits a valid view.

@@ -41,6 +41,11 @@ def test_stream_documents(self):
self.assertEqual(r.status_code, 200)
self.assertContains(r, draft.name)

EditorialDraftFactory() # Quick way to ensure RSWG exists.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is this needed? Since you have fetch_redirect_response=False, I don't think you'll actually hit the view that checks whether the group exists.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I was fighting against the internals of assertRedirects since I was redirecting to something that redirected. While that might have been better (since the redirect was to the dispatcher for group), I short-circuited to what the current place the dispatcher for group sends rswg.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ok - if you think it was better as it was I don't object to that, just want to be sure that we test that the redirects will eventually land.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 24, 2023

Codecov Report

Merging #5206 (6491682) into main (ce374ac) will increase coverage by 0.03%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #5206      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   88.54%   88.58%   +0.03%     
==========================================
  Files         295      295              
  Lines       40110    40116       +6     
==========================================
+ Hits        35516    35535      +19     
+ Misses       4594     4581      -13     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
ietf/group/views.py 90.95% <100.00%> (+0.12%) ⬆️
ietf/utils/fields.py 91.75% <100.00%> (ø)
ietf/utils/text.py 85.97% <0.00%> (-1.22%) ⬇️
ietf/nomcom/utils.py 91.30% <0.00%> (-0.25%) ⬇️
ietf/doc/views_search.py 89.04% <0.00%> (-0.21%) ⬇️
ietf/person/models.py 91.91% <0.00%> (ø)
ietf/meeting/views.py 91.12% <0.00%> (+0.27%) ⬆️
ietf/group/utils.py 94.17% <0.00%> (+0.44%) ⬆️
ietf/doc/models.py 89.01% <0.00%> (+0.85%) ⬆️

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

@rjsparks rjsparks merged commit 5c9a364 into ietf-tools:main Feb 27, 2023
@rjsparks rjsparks deleted the editorialmenu branch February 27, 2023 14:40
@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Mar 4, 2023
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

editorial refactor broke the main menu
2 participants