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

UISACQCOMP-239 Claim locations from all members for locations filter when crossTenant equals true #843

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 24, 2024

Conversation

usavkov-epam
Copy link
Contributor

@usavkov-epam usavkov-epam commented Dec 24, 2024

Purpose

https://folio-org.atlassian.net/browse/UISACQCOMP-239

This pull request enhances the stripes-acq-components module by updating the location filtering functionality to support cross-tenant environments.

Key Changes:

  • Cross-Tenant Location Retrieval: When the crossTenant parameter is set to true, the location filter now retrieves locations from all tenant members, enabling more comprehensive data access across multiple tenants.

Screenshots

chrome_qSx0eacrXl.mp4

Pre-Merge Checklist

Before merging this PR, please go through the following list and take appropriate actions.

  • I've added appropriate record to the CHANGELOG.md
  • Does this PR meet or exceed the expected quality standards?
    • Code coverage on new code is 80% or greater
    • Duplications on new code is 3% or less
    • There are no major code smells or security issues
  • Does this introduce breaking changes?
    • If any API-related changes - okapi interfaces and permissions are reviewed/changed correspondingly
    • There are no breaking changes in this PR.

If there are breaking changes, please STOP and consider the following:

  • What other modules will these changes impact?
  • Do JIRAs exist to update the impacted modules?
    • If not, please create them
    • Do they contain the appropriate level of detail? Which endpoints/schemas changed, etc.
    • Do they have all they appropriate links to blocked/related issues?
  • Are the JIRAs under active development?
    • If not, contact the project's PO and make sure they're aware of the urgency.
  • Do PRs exist for these changes?
    • If so, have they been approved?

Ideally all of the PRs involved in breaking changes would be merged in the same day to avoid breaking the folio-testing environment. Communication is paramount if that is to be achieved, especially as the number of intermodule and inter-team dependencies increase.

While it's helpful for reviewers to help identify potential problems, ensuring that it's safe to merge is ultimately the responsibility of the PR assignee.

@usavkov-epam usavkov-epam self-assigned this Dec 24, 2024
@usavkov-epam usavkov-epam requested a review from a team as a code owner December 24, 2024 08:24
@usavkov-epam usavkov-epam requested review from a team and SerhiiNosko December 24, 2024 08:28
Copy link

Jest Unit Test Statistics

    1 files  ±0  235 suites  ±0   4m 20s ⏱️ +5s
625 tests ±0  623 ✔️ ±0  2 💤 ±0  0 ±0 
628 runs  ±0  626 ✔️ ±0  2 💤 ±0  0 ±0 

Results for commit 973ce2e. ± Comparison against base commit a2bf4fe.

Copy link

BigTest Unit Test Statistics

0 tests  ±0   0 ✔️ ±0   0s ⏱️ ±0s
0 suites ±0   0 💤 ±0 
0 files   ±0   0 ±0 

Results for commit 973ce2e. ± Comparison against base commit a2bf4fe.

@usavkov-epam usavkov-epam merged commit ebd6659 into master Dec 24, 2024
6 checks passed
@usavkov-epam usavkov-epam deleted the UISACQCOMP-239 branch December 24, 2024 08:49
usavkov-epam added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 27, 2024
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