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

Added Facility Hubs #2135

Open
wants to merge 26 commits into
base: develop
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Added Facility Hubs #2135

wants to merge 26 commits into from

Conversation

shivankacker
Copy link
Member

Proposed Changes

  • Added hubs to be configured for a facility

Associated Issue

Merge Checklist

  • Tests added/fixed
  • Update docs in /docs
  • Linting Complete
  • Any other necessary step

Only PR's with test cases included and passing lint and test pipelines will be reviewed

@coronasafe/care-backend-maintainers @coronasafe/care-backend-admins

@shivankacker shivankacker requested a review from a team as a code owner May 8, 2024 00:36
care/facility/api/viewsets/facility.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
care/facility/models/facility.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
care/facility/api/serializers/facility.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
care/facility/api/serializers/facility.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
care/facility/api/serializers/facility.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
care/facility/api/serializers/facility.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@shivankacker shivankacker requested a review from sainak May 10, 2024 22:06
@nihal467
Copy link
Member

nihal467 commented May 14, 2024

lgtm,

@sainak
Copy link
Member

sainak commented May 20, 2024

@rithviknishad bump

@sainak sainak requested a review from khavinshankar May 20, 2024 15:48
@vigneshhari
Copy link
Member

Need to resolve conflicts

Copy link

codecov bot commented Aug 23, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 92.85714% with 5 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 65.32%. Comparing base (51b5c00) to head (f506f46).

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
care/facility/api/serializers/facility.py 81.81% 2 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
care/facility/models/facility.py 96.00% 1 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop    #2135      +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage    65.19%   65.32%   +0.13%     
===========================================
  Files          242      242              
  Lines        13865    13933      +68     
  Branches      1925     1930       +5     
===========================================
+ Hits          9039     9102      +63     
- Misses        4448     4451       +3     
- Partials       378      380       +2     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@gigincg gigincg removed the blocked label Aug 23, 2024
care/facility/models/facility.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
care/facility/models/facility.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
care/facility/models/facility.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
care/facility/models/facility.py Show resolved Hide resolved
care/facility/models/facility.py Show resolved Hide resolved
care/facility/api/serializers/facility.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
care/facility/api/viewsets/facility.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
care/facility/api/viewsets/facility.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
care/facility/api/viewsets/facility.py Show resolved Hide resolved
care/facility/api/viewsets/facility.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@shivankacker shivankacker self-assigned this Sep 2, 2024
@nihal467
Copy link
Member

nihal467 commented Sep 2, 2024

LGTM

Copy link
Contributor

@anroopak anroopak left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM.

Copy link
Member

@vigneshhari vigneshhari left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Approving without Reviewing

check=~models.Q(hub=models.F("spoke")),
name="hub_and_spoke_not_same",
),
# bidirectional uniqueness
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This ensures bi directional uniqueness, but it does not make sense to have cyclical dependences

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think the check is already there in serializers if I am understanding you correctly. I have also added it in the model now. Can you please verify if that is what you meant?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Status: Review required
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants