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

UITEN-290 - Make dependency on mod-reading-rooms optional. #407

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 30, 2024

Conversation

Terala-Priyanka
Copy link
Contributor

@Terala-Priyanka Terala-Priyanka commented May 29, 2024

Purpose

UITEN-290 - Make dependency on mod-reading-rooms optional.

Approach

Earlier "reading-room" interface was included in okapiInterfaces and have been marked as BREAKING and the version in package.json was bumped up. This PR intends to correct the same by moving the interface into optionalOkapiInterfaces list and reverting the version in package.json. Also, changelog has been updated to remove "BREAKING" signature for earlier change.

Note: I don't see any other team worked on this module after it was marked as breaking change. Hence I think it is safe to revert and I don't think any other team needs to be informed of this change.

Learning

Pre-Merge Checklist

Before merging this PR, please go through the following list and take appropriate actions.

  • I've added appropriate record to the CHANGELOG.md
  • Does this PR meet or exceed the expected quality standards?
    • Code coverage on new code is 80% or greater
    • Duplications on new code is 3% or less
    • There are no major code smells or security issues
  • Does this introduce breaking changes?
    • If any API-related changes - okapi interfaces and permissions are reviewed/changed correspondingly
    • There are no breaking changes in this PR.

If there are breaking changes, please STOP and consider the following:

  • What other modules will these changes impact?
  • Do JIRAs exist to update the impacted modules?
    • If not, please create them
    • Do they contain the appropriate level of detail? Which endpoints/schemas changed, etc.
    • Do they have all they appropriate links to blocked/related issues?
  • Are the JIRAs under active development?
    • If not, contact the project's PO and make sure they're aware of the urgency.
  • Do PRs exist for these changes?
    • If so, have they been approved?

Ideally all of the PRs involved in breaking changes would be merged in the same day to avoid breaking the folio-testing environment. Communication is paramount if that is to be achieved, especially as the number of intermodule and inter-team dependencies increase.

While it's helpful for reviewers to help identify potential problems, ensuring that it's safe to merge is ultimately the responsibility of the PR assignee.

@Terala-Priyanka Terala-Priyanka self-assigned this May 29, 2024
@Terala-Priyanka Terala-Priyanka marked this pull request as draft May 29, 2024 07:30
Copy link

github-actions bot commented May 29, 2024

Jest Unit Test Statistics

    1 files  ±0  28 suites  ±0   2m 20s ⏱️ +5s
106 tests ±0  94 ✔️ ±0  12 💤 ±0  0 ±0 
108 runs  ±0  96 ✔️ ±0  12 💤 ±0  0 ±0 

Results for commit de2dfc3. ± Comparison against base commit 2c15a18.

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

Copy link

github-actions bot commented May 29, 2024

BigTest Unit Test Statistics

0 tests  ±0   0 ✔️ ±0   0s ⏱️ ±0s
0 suites ±0   0 💤 ±0 
0 files   ±0   0 ±0 

Results for commit de2dfc3. ± Comparison against base commit 2c15a18.

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

Copy link

sonarcloud bot commented May 29, 2024

Quality Gate Passed Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
No data about Coverage
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarCloud

@Terala-Priyanka Terala-Priyanka requested review from manvendra-s-rathore and a team May 29, 2024 07:36
@Terala-Priyanka Terala-Priyanka marked this pull request as ready for review May 29, 2024 09:30
@Terala-Priyanka Terala-Priyanka merged commit ddd97b8 into master May 30, 2024
6 checks passed
@Terala-Priyanka Terala-Priyanka deleted the UITEN-290 branch May 30, 2024 09:26
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