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

UIPQB-46: Incorrect text when no options available in the query builder's search bar #56

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Sep 21, 2023

Conversation

UladzislauKutarkin
Copy link
Contributor

@UladzislauKutarkin UladzislauKutarkin commented Sep 15, 2023

UIPQB-46

Purpose

Approach

TODOS and Open Questions

Learning

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.

@UladzislauKutarkin UladzislauKutarkin requested a review from a team September 15, 2023 11:22
@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Sep 15, 2023

Jest Unit Test Statistics

  1 files  ±0    8 suites  ±0   31s ⏱️ +3s
52 tests ±0  50 ✔️ ±0  2 💤 ±0  0 ±0 
54 runs  ±0  52 ✔️ ±0  2 💤 ±0  0 ±0 

Results for commit 5500336. ± Comparison against base commit a705aeb.

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

@UladzislauKutarkin
Copy link
Contributor Author

Screen.Recording.2023-09-15.at.15.17.38.mov

@Dmitriy-Litvinenko Dmitriy-Litvinenko requested a review from a team September 19, 2023 08:52
@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

No Coverage information No Coverage information
0.0% 0.0% Duplication

@UladzislauKutarkin UladzislauKutarkin merged commit 024edb4 into master Sep 21, 2023
@UladzislauKutarkin UladzislauKutarkin deleted the UIPQB-46 branch September 21, 2023 19:14
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