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 Provide 'instanceTenantId' from the PO form to PO line form #1513

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Oct 12, 2023

Conversation

usavkov-epam
Copy link
Contributor

@usavkov-epam usavkov-epam commented Oct 12, 2023

Purpose

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

This PR is for the missed part of #1511

There are two ways of navigating to the orders app from the inventory (when creating an order from an instance): to the PO form and to the PO Line form. In both cases, we should handle the provided instanceTenantId. The previous PR (#1511) covers only the second way. So we still need to provide instanseTenantId to the PO line form, but now from PO form.

Approach

Pass the instanceTenantId value from inventory to PO line form through PO form.

Screenshots

chrome_a4vnUgWJPU.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 12, 2023
@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Oct 12, 2023

Jest Unit Test Statistics

    1 files  ±0  234 suites  ±0   9m 40s ⏱️ + 1m 54s
586 tests +1  586 ✔️ +1  0 💤 ±0  0 ±0 
594 runs  +1  594 ✔️ +1  0 💤 ±0  0 ±0 

Results for commit 12683e4. ± Comparison against base commit 2d39c94.

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Oct 12, 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 12683e4. ± Comparison against base commit 2d39c94.

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

@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 33da646 into master Oct 12, 2023
5 checks passed
@usavkov-epam usavkov-epam deleted the UIOR-1159 branch October 12, 2023 18:11
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