Don't require comment if no audited_changes present #522
Conversation
This file contains 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
james
added a commit
to dxw/affordable-housing-monitoring
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 5, 2019
We had two bugs with the audited gem, and I've opened PRs for both of them: collectiveidea/audited#522 collectiveidea/audited#523 In the meantime, while we're waiting for them to hopefully be approved and merged, I have created my own fork with a branch that has both of those changes in. This means that we no longer need the monkey pathes in the dwelling and development models. Also update the specs to reflect the new, fixed error messages.
If a model requires audit comments, but you only edit attributes that are excluded from auditing, then don't require an audit comment.
james
force-pushed
the
fix/dont-require-comment-if-not-audited-changes
branch
from
9bbe252 to
692cc86
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Change
If a model requires audit comments, but you only change attributes that are excluded from auditing, then don't require an audit comment.
Example of need
I'm working on a project with Southwark Council. We are creating a public audit log of changes to affordable housing in the local area. I have needed to monkey patch this fix/feature in twice:
dxw/affordable-housing-monitoring@1f0bc0d#diff-70e52879b0769bbfd76a2cc96ac3e32aR38 - I don't want to create an audit log entry when changing the aasm state field. By adding the
statefield as an excluded column, this fixes that, but then creates a validation error if I turn oncomment_requireddxw/affordable-housing-monitoring@b5c6475#diff-02864dac712ea1f466e4165075e103cdR23 - A different user of the system edits two attributes on this model to the other attributes on the model, and I don't want to create audit logs for these either. Same problem as above
Considerations
I am pretty certain that this is a bug when it comes to updating a model. However, my suggested fix also makes it so that an audit comment isn't required if you're creating a model where only excluded attributes are present. I think there is more room for debate around whether this is expected/desired behaviour.