[WEB-2442] fix: Issue detail activity for related to relation

[rahulramesha]

This PR adds the missing relates to relation activity to issue detail activity

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Bug Fixes
  • Improved reliability of the activity content retrieval by ensuring all cases in the control flow return a valid string value, preventing undefined behavior.

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

The pull request modifies the getRelationActivityContent function in web/ce/components/relations/activity.ts. The change specifically addresses the handling of the relates_to case within a switch statement, where a missing return statement was added. This ensures that the function consistently returns a string value for this case, thus improving reliability. No other cases or parameters were altered, and there were no changes to exported or public entities.

Changes

File Path	Change Summary
web/ce/components/relations/activity.ts	Added a return statement to the relates_to case in the getRelationActivityContent function to ensure consistent return values.

Possibly related PRs

• [WEB-2525] fix: activity filters #5682: Modifications to the ActivityFilterRoot component related to activity handling.
• [WEB-2320] fix: Redirect to issues page post issue deletion deletion #5437: Refactor of the handleDeleteIssue function, potentially relating to control flow improvements.
• [WEB-2537 ] fix: issue quick action #5692: Enhancements to event handling in the RelationIssueListItem component, relevant to control flow improvements.

Suggested reviewers

• SatishGandham

Poem

🐇 In the code where rabbits play,
A return was lost, but now it's okay.
With relates_to shining bright,
Our function's flow is now just right.
Hopping through logic, so clear and sound,
In the world of code, joy can be found! 🌟

---

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?

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

• Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
  • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
  • Generate unit testing code for this file.
  • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
• Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
  • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
• PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
  • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
  • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
  • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

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)

• @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
• @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
• @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
• @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
• @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
• @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
• @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
• @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

• Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
• Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
• Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

• You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
• Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
• If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

• Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
• Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
• Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)

web/ce/components/relations/activity.ts (1)

Line range hint 3-19: Consider these improvements for better type safety and maintainability.

1. Make the switch statement exhaustive using TypeScript's union type
2. Use template literals for better readability
3. Make the default case explicit

Here's how you could improve the code:

- export const getRelationActivityContent = (activity: TIssueActivity | undefined): string | undefined => {
+ type RelationType = 'blocking' | 'blocked_by' | 'duplicate' | 'relates_to';
+ 
+ export const getRelationActivityContent = (activity: TIssueActivity | undefined): string | undefined => {
  if (!activity) return;

-  switch (activity.field) {
+  switch (activity.field as RelationType) {
    case "blocking":
-      return activity.old_value === "" ? `marked this issue is blocking issue ` : `removed the blocking issue `;
+      return activity.old_value === "" ? 
+        `marked this issue is blocking issue ` : 
+        `removed the blocking issue `;
    case "blocked_by":
-      return activity.old_value === ""
-        ? `marked this issue is being blocked by `
-        : `removed this issue being blocked by issue `;
+      return activity.old_value === "" ?
+        `marked this issue is being blocked by ` :
+        `removed this issue being blocked by issue `;
    case "duplicate":
-      return activity.old_value === "" ? `marked this issue as duplicate of ` : `removed this issue as a duplicate of `;
+      return activity.old_value === "" ?
+        `marked this issue as duplicate of ` :
+        `removed this issue as a duplicate of `;
    case "relates_to":
-      return activity.old_value === "" ? `marked that this issue relates to ` : `removed the relation from `;
+      return activity.old_value === "" ?
+        `marked that this issue relates to ` :
+        `removed the relation from `;
+    default:
+      return undefined;
  }
-
-  return;
};

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 7574206 and 9c3915d.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• web/ce/components/relations/activity.ts (1 hunks)

🔇 Additional comments (1)

web/ce/components/relations/activity.ts (1)

16-16: LGTM! The relates_to case is now properly handled.

The added return statement follows the same pattern as other relation types and correctly handles both adding and removing relations.