Skip to content

Conversation

@shahzadaziz
Copy link
Collaborator

No description provided.

@shahzadaziz shahzadaziz requested a review from a team as a code owner October 11, 2023 21:35
</MenuItem>
)}
{canEdit && (
{canEdit && !isResolved && (
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is it not possible to have a backend change for this? If canEdit is false if the status is resolved on the backend, then we wouldn't need this extra flag on the FE.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

@shahzadaziz shahzadaziz Oct 12, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ya I have been looking into EUW endpoints and extending permissions to add isResolved to both top level comment and replies. That seems like a better place put these checks.

That work is currently blocked but we can disregard this PR if that is the direction we agree on.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah I agree with the direction of extending permissions. This will also prevent users from bypassing the ui and hitting the endpoint directly.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

On the back-end canEdit should already be checking resolution status for top level and replies. I would be curious why it isn't coming through.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@shahzadaziz Before your changes, did the menu item to modify comment show up when the comment is resolved?

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