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

UIOR-1159 Use a provided tenantId when loading an instance in a PO line form #1511

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Oct 12, 2023

Conversation

usavkov-epam
Copy link
Contributor

@usavkov-epam usavkov-epam commented Oct 10, 2023

Purpose

https://issues.folio.org/browse/UIOR-1159
https://issues.folio.org/browse/UIIN-2614

In order to support creating an order from an instance in the "consortium" mode, a PO line form must have the ability to fetch instance data in the specific tenant (actually the central tenant for shared instances).

Approach

  • Implement a hook to make requests to the specific tenant;
  • Fetch an instance data based on instanceTenantId location state value, provided by the inventory app.

Screenshots

chrome_bXKlGDga9l.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 Oct 10, 2023
@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Oct 10, 2023

Jest Unit Test Statistics

    1 files  ±0  234 suites  +1   8m 48s ⏱️ - 1m 28s
585 tests +2  585 ✔️ +2  0 💤 ±0  0 ±0 
593 runs  +2  593 ✔️ +2  0 💤 ±0  0 ±0 

Results for commit 9d8e026. ± Comparison against base commit 80f64e1.

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Oct 10, 2023

BigTest Unit Test Statistics

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

Results for commit 9d8e026. ± Comparison against base commit 80f64e1.

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

@alisher-epam
Copy link
Contributor

@usavkov-epam It looks good. Could you fix linting issues for the file please src/components/LayerCollection/LayerPOLine.js

@sonarqubecloud
Copy link

Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!    Quality Gate passed

Bug A 0 Bugs
Vulnerability A 0 Vulnerabilities
Security Hotspot A 0 Security Hotspots
Code Smell A 0 Code Smells

100.0% 100.0% Coverage
0.0% 0.0% Duplication

@usavkov-epam usavkov-epam merged commit 2d39c94 into master Oct 12, 2023
5 checks passed
@usavkov-epam usavkov-epam deleted the UIOR-1159 branch October 12, 2023 12:06
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