fix(j-s): Notification migration #16378
Conversation
WalkthroughThe changes in this pull request involve modifications to the migration file Changes
Possibly related PRs
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
Documentation and Community
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
apps/judicial-system/backend/migrations/20241003213354-update-notification.js (1)
Line range hint
32-54: Thedownfunction looks consistent, but could benefit from a comment.The
downfunction correctly includes the newDEFENDER_ASSIGNEDenum value and maintains the same order as theupfunction. This ensures proper rollback capability.Consider adding a comment to explain the purpose of the
downfunction, for example:down: (queryInterface) => { // This function reverts the changes made in the 'up' function, // ensuring that the enum can be rolled back to its previous state if needed. return replaceEnum({ // ... (existing code) }) },
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/migrations/20241003213354-update-notification.js (1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (1)
apps/judicial-system/backend/migrations/20241003213354-update-notification.js (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
🔇 Additional comments (2)
apps/judicial-system/backend/migrations/20241003213354-update-notification.js (2)
Line range hint
1-54: Overall, the migration file looks good with minor suggestions for improvement.The migration file is well-structured and correctly implements the addition of the
DEFENDER_ASSIGNEDenum value. The use ofsequelize-replace-enum-postgresis appropriate for updating enum types in PostgreSQL. The changes are consistent between theupanddownfunctions, ensuring proper migration and rollback capabilities.To further improve the file:
- Clarify the "Changed value" comment next to
ADVOCATE_ASSIGNEDin theupfunction.- Consider adding a brief comment to the
downfunction explaining its purpose.These minor improvements will enhance the readability and maintainability of the migration file.
19-20: Addition ofDEFENDER_ASSIGNEDlooks good, but clarification needed onADVOCATE_ASSIGNED.The addition of
DEFENDER_ASSIGNEDaligns with the PR objectives. However, the comment "Changed value" next toADVOCATE_ASSIGNEDis unclear. Could you please clarify howADVOCATE_ASSIGNEDhas changed?To ensure consistency, let's verify the order of enum values:
✅ Verification successful
Enum values order is consistent across migration files.
The addition of
DEFENDER_ASSignedand the modification toADVOCATE_Assignedmaintain consistency with existing enum value orders.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check the order of enum values in other migration files # Find all migration files migration_files=$(fd -e js -p "apps/judicial-system/backend/migrations") # Search for enum definitions in these files for file in $migration_files; do echo "File: $file" rg "newValues: \[" -A 20 "$file" echo "------------------------" doneLength of output: 160276
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #16378 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 36.75% 36.75%
=======================================
Files 6804 6804
Lines 140903 140903
Branches 40137 40137
=======================================
Hits 51785 51785
Misses 89118 89118
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.
|
Datadog ReportAll test runs ✅ 5 Total Test Services: 0 Failed, 5 Passed Test Services
|
What
Fix notification migration
Summary by CodeRabbit
DEFENDER_ASSIGNED, enhancing the notification system.ADVOCATE_ASSIGNED.