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

Add new suborganizations on domain request approval #3025

Open
3 tasks done
gabydisarli opened this issue Nov 4, 2024 · 7 comments · May be fixed by #3250
Open
3 tasks done

Add new suborganizations on domain request approval #3025

gabydisarli opened this issue Nov 4, 2024 · 7 comments · May be fixed by #3250
Assignees
Labels
dev issue is for the dev team Feature: 🧮 Analyst Experience Issue to improve the Analysts workflow Feature: 🏢 Org Model

Comments

@gabydisarli
Copy link
Contributor

gabydisarli commented Nov 4, 2024

Description

When a portfolio user makes a new domain request, they can specify that the request is for the parent org, an existing suborg, or a new suborg. If they add a new suborg, we don't want that suborg added to the suborg table until the request is approved, since an analyst might request a change, or make a change directly to the suborg on the request.

Once the request is approved, though, the suborganization should be added as part of the request approval, to the suborganizations table.

Acceptance Criteria

  • If a domain request within a portfolio has a new suborganization (user chose "Other" and then provided a new suborganization name), that suborganization should be created in the suborganization table when the domain request is approved.
  • An analyst should be able to change the suborganization on a requested domain.
    • An analyst should be able to choose to have "no suborganization" (--- in our system) which will remove all suborg data from the request (okay to have this apply on save)
    • If the analyst chooses an existing suborganization, no new suborganizations should be created
    • If the analyst provides a new suborganization name, that new name should be created as a new suborganization, just as if the user had requested it.
  • If a domain request transitions from "Approved" to: "In Review", "Action Needed", "Rejected", or "Ineligible" and that request is the only one using a specific suborganization, the suborganization should be removed from the suborganization table.

Additional Context

After some discussion on ticket #2935, we determined that we'd like a quick and easy solution for analysts before we build a more robust flow to allow them to approve, update or deny manual suborganizations requests coming in from portfolio / org model users

Issue Links

@gabydisarli gabydisarli changed the title [DRAFT] Analyst review & approval of manually requested suborganizations Analyst review & approval of manually requested suborganizations Nov 8, 2024
@gabydisarli gabydisarli added design issue is for the design team dev issue is for the dev team labels Nov 8, 2024
@katypies katypies moved this from 👶 New to 🍦 Backlog in .gov Product Board Nov 18, 2024
@katypies katypies moved this from 🍦 Backlog to 🎯 Ready in .gov Product Board Nov 22, 2024
@katypies katypies changed the title Analyst review & approval of manually requested suborganizations Add new suborganizations on domain request approval Nov 22, 2024
@katypies katypies added Feature: 🧮 Analyst Experience Issue to improve the Analysts workflow and removed design issue is for the design team story User stories labels Nov 22, 2024
@zandercymatics zandercymatics self-assigned this Dec 16, 2024
@zandercymatics
Copy link
Contributor

zandercymatics commented Dec 16, 2024

If a domain request transitions from "Approved" to "In Review" or "Action Needed", and that request is the only one using a specific suborganization, the suborganization should be removed from the suborganization table.

@katypies / @gabydisarli Should we also include rejected and ineligible here?

@gabydisarli
Copy link
Contributor Author

gabydisarli commented Dec 16, 2024

@zandercymatics Good question. For rejected, I'd say include. Ineligible too, but, I imagine that won't be an issue in org model right?

@katypies
Copy link
Contributor

@zandercymatics - we're not creating a suborg upon rejection or ineligible, right? I think we're only creating a suborg if the initial request was approved. So, we shouldn't need to "undo" the creation of the suborg, since it wouldn't have been created if the request was put into a different state besides approved?

@zandercymatics
Copy link
Contributor

zandercymatics commented Dec 16, 2024

@katypies I am referring to the pathway of APPROVED -> REJECTED or APPROVED -> INELIGIBLE (so for instance an analyst accidentally approves when they meant to reject so they swap from approved to rejected). A suborg is only created on approval, but we need to do some cleanup after the fact if we change states in that scenario.

For rejected, I'd say include. Ineligible too, but, I imagine that won't be an issue in org model right?

Awesome, thanks. To answer your question: for ineligible I see that being very rare but I can see a path of where it may be desired. For example, say an org-level administrative mistake occurred and a user was granted request permissions when they weren't supposed to have them, or they otherwise misuse that permission. Said org gets an approval email and wants to rectify it after the fact, hence requiring this flow.

I may just be too deep in theoretical territory though, bcc: @h-m-f-t

@zandercymatics
Copy link
Contributor

Modified the ticket to add rejection and ineligible since it seems like we generally want that for now. I can change it back later if the result of this conversation differs, though

@gabydisarli
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hey Zander, we just discussed this in the org model meeting and agree with your direction. cc: @h-m-f-t @katypies @zandercymatics

@zandercymatics zandercymatics moved this from 🎯 Ready to 🏗 In progress in .gov Product Board Dec 17, 2024
@zandercymatics zandercymatics moved this from 🏗 In progress to 👀 In review in .gov Product Board Dec 20, 2024
@zandercymatics
Copy link
Contributor

@CocoByte assigned you as you are assisting with the PR as it is in review

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
dev issue is for the dev team Feature: 🧮 Analyst Experience Issue to improve the Analysts workflow Feature: 🏢 Org Model
Projects
Status: 👀 In review
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants