-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 951
[BUG] Enable setting review notifications without delegation #3220
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
Open
deiga
wants to merge
13
commits into
integrations:main
Choose a base branch
from
F-Secure-web:allow_setting_review_notifications_without_delegation
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
13 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
72c3154
Update docs
deiga fd33657
Update tests and add missing coverage
deiga e9fd5be
Add more tests to cover `Import` and a few more `Update` cases
deiga f64a3fb
Refactor `Import` to be Context-aware
deiga d961c7c
Refactor to use Context-aware functions
deiga ed80f2b
Use `resource.ParallelTest` to make testing quicker
deiga 6db1fc2
Remove unused call to `Read`
deiga 5a70547
Uncouple `Create` and `Update`
deiga fdf3811
Fix resource to be able to set empty `review_request_delegation` block
deiga 2376026
Add top-level `notify` to enable setting it without `review_request_d…
deiga a9e42e1
Update docs
deiga dc6f431
Consolidate `getTeamSlugContext` and `resolveTeamIDs` to use shared l…
deiga 28b45a8
Remove named returns
deiga File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not sure there is any value to using
GetOk()here given the way it works and the fact that you're using an explicit schema?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The way I understand the code is that this is exactly where
GetOk()should work forTypeBool.It should check if
notifyhas been set in the config, right? Of course the tests don't have that scenario at all 🙃There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Or how else would I be checking which one of the fields is actually set? Should I just read both and see if either is true? That sounds simpler 🤔