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

Clicking links in statusdb should look for exact matches #3998

Open
3 tasks
islean opened this issue Dec 5, 2024 · 0 comments
Open
3 tasks

Clicking links in statusdb should look for exact matches #3998

islean opened this issue Dec 5, 2024 · 0 comments

Comments

@islean
Copy link
Contributor

islean commented Dec 5, 2024

As a user of the statusdb web ui,
I want links between tables to be exact,
So that I do not see confusing data.

Basically - when I press the internal id of a case and get to the CaseSample table, we seem to be looking for internal_ids which merely contain the internal_id we pressed. This is annoying as there could be entries not at all connected to the relevant case and there should be no reason to not look for an exact match.

Work impact

Answer the following questions:

  • Is there currently a workaround for this issue? If so, what is it?
    • Be careful when pressing the links so that you do not assume that all links are relevant.
  • How much time would be saved by implementing this feature on a weekly basis?
    • None unless the user mistakes a sample for another
  • How many users are affected by this issue?
    • All users of statusdb
  • Are customers affected by this issue?
    • If we screw up

Acceptance Criteria

  • Following a link to a sample only shows the entries in CaseSample table linked to the same sample
  • Following a link to a case only shows the entries in the CaseSample table linked to the same case
  • Criteria 3
    ...

Notes

  • Additional information.
  • Dependencies.
  • Related user stories.
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

No branches or pull requests

1 participant