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

[MODFIN-352] Removed old transaction API #245

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Apr 16, 2024
Merged

[MODFIN-352] Removed old transaction API #245

merged 5 commits into from
Apr 16, 2024

Conversation

damien-git
Copy link
Contributor

@damien-git damien-git commented Apr 10, 2024

Purpose

MODFIN-352 - Remove the old transaction API

Approach

  • Removed the old endpoints
  • Creating allocations and transfers is now done with a batch request - this will allow more simplifications in mod-finance-storage (the 2 endpoints to create allocations and transfers with mod-finance are preserved for now because they are still used by UI)
  • Refactoring; transaction processing is now handled in 2 classes: TransactionService and TransactionApiService, with TransactionApiService handling only API requests while TransactionService can be used by any other service. The same division was applied to FiscalYearService.
  • Improved error handling when creating budgets
  • Updated unit tests
  • Minor changes are needed in mod-finance-storage (see that related PR); this does not include API removal and simplification in mod-finance-storage

mod-finance-storage PR
integration tests PR
mod-orders PR
mod-invoice PR
ui-finance PR
ui-orders PR

Pre-Merge Checklist:

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

  • 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?
    • Were any API paths or methods changed, added or removed?
    • Were there any schema changes?
    • Did any of the interface versions change?
    • Were permissions changed, added or removed?
    • Are there new interface dependencies?
    • 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 the 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?
  • Did you modify code to call some additional endpoints?
    • If so, do you check that necessary module permission added in ModuleDescriptor-template.yaml file?

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

@damien-git damien-git requested a review from a team April 10, 2024 14:51
@@ -599,102 +599,24 @@
},
{
"id": "finance.transactions",
"version": "5.1",
"version": "6.0",
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

before merge need to increate dependent UI version, will ask @usavkov-epam to apply this change

Copy link

@SerhiiNosko
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks @damien-git for this cleanup

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.

4 participants