feat(j-s): Judge confirms defender and civil claimant defense choices #16480
Conversation
Datadog ReportAll test runs ✅ 50 Total Test Services: 0 Failed, 48 Passed Test ServicesThis report shows up to 10 services
🔻 Code Coverage Decreases vs Default Branch (3) |
unakb
changed the title
WalkthroughThis pull request introduces updates to the judicial system's data models and GraphQL schemas, focusing on the addition of new optional boolean fields related to defender and spokesperson confirmations. These changes affect various classes and migration scripts, ensuring that new properties are included in both the database and application logic. The updates enhance validation and access control mechanisms to reflect the new fields, improving the overall functionality of the system. Changes
Possibly related PRs
Suggested labels
Suggested reviewers
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
Documentation and Community
|
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/defendant.service.ts
Show resolved
Hide resolved
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 7
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (16)
apps/judicial-system/backend/migrations/20241018105400-update-civil-claimant.js (1)
1-26: Overall implementation is solid, with a minor suggestion for improvement.The migration file follows Sequelize best practices:
- Exports
upanddownfunctions- Uses transactions for data integrity
- Focuses on a single, atomic change
- Has a timestamped filename for proper ordering
Suggestion for improvement:
Consider adding explicit error logging to bothupanddownfunctions. While Sequelize transactions will automatically rollback on error, logging errors can aid in debugging if issues arise during deployment.Example implementation:
up: (queryInterface, Sequelize) => { return queryInterface.sequelize.transaction((t) => queryInterface.addColumn( 'civil_claimant', 'is_spokesperson_confirmed', { type: Sequelize.BOOLEAN, allowNull: true, }, { transaction: t }, ) ).catch(error => { console.error('Migration up failed:', error); throw error; }); },apps/judicial-system/backend/migrations/20241015110312-update-defendant.js (1)
2-25: LGTM! Consider minor formatting improvements.The 'up' method correctly implements the addition of two new columns to the 'defendant' table, using a transaction for data integrity. The column names and types align with the PR objectives.
Consider improving code readability by aligning the object properties:
queryInterface.addColumn( 'defendant', 'is_defender_choice_confirmed', { - type: Sequelize.BOOLEAN, - allowNull: true, + type: Sequelize.BOOLEAN, + allowNull: true, }, { transaction: t }, ),apps/judicial-system/api/src/app/modules/defendant/models/civilClaimant.model.ts (1)
47-48: LGTM! Consider adding a comment for clarity.The new field
isSpokespersonConfirmedis well-implemented, adhering to the existing code style and TypeScript best practices. It's properly typed and decorated for GraphQL integration.Consider adding a brief comment to explain the purpose of this field, for example:
/** * Indicates whether the judge has confirmed the spokesperson for this civil claimant. */ @Field(() => Boolean, { nullable: true }) readonly isSpokespersonConfirmed?: booleanThis would enhance code readability and maintain consistency with potential documentation in other parts of the codebase.
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/dto/updateCivilClaimant.dto.ts (1)
56-59: LGTM! Consider adding a brief comment for clarity.The new
isSpokespersonConfirmedproperty is well-implemented and aligns with the PR objectives. The use of decorators is consistent with other properties in the class, and thereadonlymodifier ensures immutability.Consider adding a brief comment above the property to explain its purpose and when it's set to true. This would enhance code readability and maintainability. For example:
/** * Indicates whether the judge has confirmed the spokesperson for the civil claimant. */ @IsOptional() @IsBoolean() @ApiPropertyOptional({ type: Boolean }) readonly isSpokespersonConfirmed?: booleanapps/judicial-system/api/src/app/modules/defendant/dto/updateCivilClaimant.input.ts (1)
65-68: Approved: New field adheres to best practices. Consider adding JSDoc.The new
isSpokespersonConfirmedfield is well-implemented, following the established patterns in the class and adhering to GraphQL best practices. It aligns with the PR objectives to enhance judicial control over indictment cases.Consider adding a JSDoc comment to provide more context about this field:
/** * Indicates whether the judge has confirmed the spokesperson for the civil claimant. */ @Allow() @IsOptional() @Field(() => Boolean, { nullable: true }) readonly isSpokespersonConfirmed?: booleanapps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/dto/createDefendant.dto.ts (1)
62-71: LGTM! Consider adding JSDoc comments for clarity.The new properties
isDefenderChoiceConfirmedandcaseFilesSharedWithDefenderare correctly implemented as optional booleans with appropriate decorators. They align well with the PR objectives and maintain consistency with the existing code style.To further improve code clarity, consider adding JSDoc comments to describe the purpose of these new fields:
/** * Indicates whether the judge has confirmed the defender choice. */ @IsOptional() @IsBoolean() @ApiPropertyOptional({ type: Boolean }) readonly isDefenderChoiceConfirmed?: boolean; /** * Indicates whether case files have been shared with the defender. */ @IsOptional() @IsBoolean() @ApiPropertyOptional({ type: Boolean }) readonly caseFilesSharedWithDefender?: boolean;apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/dto/updateSubpoena.dto.ts (1)
68-76: LGTM! Consider grouping related properties.The new properties
isDefenderChoiceConfirmedandcaseFilesSharedWithDefenderare well-implemented with appropriate decorators and types. They align with the PR objectives and enhance the judicial process control.Consider grouping these new properties with other defender-related properties in the DTO for better code organization. For example, you could move them near the
defenderChoiceproperty.apps/judicial-system/api/src/app/modules/defendant/dto/updateDefendant.input.ts (1)
97-106: LGTM! Consider adding JSDoc comments for clarity.The implementation of
isDefenderChoiceConfirmedandcaseFilesSharedWithDefenderfields is correct and aligns well with the existing code structure and PR objectives. The use of decorators and TypeScript types is appropriate.To enhance code readability and maintainability, consider adding JSDoc comments to describe the purpose of these new fields. For example:
/** * Indicates whether the judge has confirmed the defender's choice. */ @Allow() @IsOptional() @Field(() => Boolean, { nullable: true }) readonly isDefenderChoiceConfirmed?: boolean /** * Indicates whether case files have been shared with the defender. */ @Allow() @IsOptional() @Field(() => Boolean, { nullable: true }) readonly caseFilesSharedWithDefender?: booleanapps/judicial-system/api/src/app/modules/defendant/models/defendant.model.ts (1)
93-97: LGTM! Consider adding JSDoc comments for the new fields.The new fields
isDefenderChoiceConfirmedandcaseFilesSharedWithDefenderare well-implemented and consistent with the existing code structure. They follow TypeScript and GraphQL best practices, maintaining type safety and proper schema generation.To improve code documentation, consider adding JSDoc comments for these new fields. For example:
/** * Indicates whether the defender's choice has been confirmed by the judge. */ @Field(() => Boolean, { nullable: true }) readonly isDefenderChoiceConfirmed?: boolean /** * Indicates whether case files have been shared with the defender. */ @Field(() => Boolean, { nullable: true }) readonly caseFilesSharedWithDefender?: booleanThis addition would enhance code readability and provide context for other developers working on this model.
apps/judicial-system/web/src/components/FormProvider/case.graphql (1)
29-29: LGTM: New fieldcaseFilesSharedWithDefenderadded correctly.The new field
caseFilesSharedWithDefenderis appropriately placed in thedefendantssection and aligns with the PR objectives. It will allow tracking whether case files have been shared with the defender.Consider using a consistent naming convention for boolean fields. For example, you could rename this field to
isCaseFilesSharedWithDefenderto match the style ofisDefenderChoiceConfirmed.apps/judicial-system/xrd-api/src/app/app.service.ts (2)
99-107: Good use of TypeScript for defender info structure.The introduction of the
defenderInfoobject improves code organization and type safety. Consider using a TypeScript interface or type alias for this structure to enhance reusability and maintainability.Example improvement:
interface DefenderInfo { defenderName: string | undefined; defenderEmail: string | undefined; defenderPhoneNumber: string | undefined; } let defenderInfo: DefenderInfo = { defenderName: undefined, defenderEmail: undefined, defenderPhoneNumber: undefined, };
156-163: Approved: Consistent updates toupdateToSendobject.The additions to the
updateToSendobject align well with the newdefenderInfostructure. Consider using optional chaining for added safety:requestedDefenderName: defenderInfo?.defenderName,This change would prevent potential undefined errors if
defenderInfois unexpectedlynullorundefined.apps/judicial-system/web/src/utils/validate.ts (2)
472-473: LGTM! Consider enhancing readability.The addition of
DefenderChoice.DELAYaligns with the PR objectives. It correctly broadens the criteria for valid defender choices.Consider refactoring the condition for improved readability:
- defendant.defenderChoice === DefenderChoice.WAIVE || - defendant.defenderChoice === DefenderChoice.DELAY || - !defendant.defenderChoice || + [DefenderChoice.WAIVE, DefenderChoice.DELAY, undefined].includes(defendant.defenderChoice) ||
Line range hint
1-1: Address the TODO comment: Add tests for validation functions.The TODO comment at the beginning of the file indicates that tests are missing. Given the critical nature of validation functions in ensuring data integrity, it's important to add comprehensive unit tests for these functions.
Would you like assistance in generating unit tests for the validation functions in this file?
apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Advocates/SelectCivilClaimantAdvocate.tsx (2)
100-101: Simplify null and undefined checksYou can simplify the condition:
civilClaimant.spokespersonIsLawyer === null || civilClaimant.spokespersonIsLawyer === undefinedby using:
civilClaimant.spokespersonIsLawyer == nullwhich checks for both
nullandundefined. This makes the code more concise.
Line range hint
70-86: Reduce duplication in RadioButton componentsBoth
RadioButtoncomponents share similar code structures. Consider creating a reusable component or mapping over an array of options to generate them dynamically, which would improve code maintainability.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (21)
- apps/judicial-system/api/src/app/modules/defendant/dto/updateCivilClaimant.input.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/api/src/app/modules/defendant/dto/updateDefendant.input.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/api/src/app/modules/defendant/models/civilClaimant.model.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/api/src/app/modules/defendant/models/defendant.model.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/migrations/20241015110312-update-defendant.js (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/migrations/20241018105400-update-civil-claimant.js (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/defendant.service.ts (2 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/dto/createDefendant.dto.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/dto/updateCivilClaimant.dto.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/dto/updateDefendant.dto.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/models/civilClaimant.model.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/models/defendant.model.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/dto/updateSubpoena.dto.ts (2 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/subpoena.service.ts (5 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/digital-mailbox-api/src/app/modules/cases/case.service.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/web/src/components/FormProvider/case.graphql (2 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Advocates/Advocates.strings.ts (2 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Advocates/SelectCivilClaimantAdvocate.tsx (7 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Advocates/SelectDefender.tsx (4 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/web/src/utils/validate.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/xrd-api/src/app/app.service.ts (3 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (21)
apps/judicial-system/api/src/app/modules/defendant/dto/updateCivilClaimant.input.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/api/src/app/modules/defendant/dto/updateDefendant.input.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/api/src/app/modules/defendant/models/civilClaimant.model.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/api/src/app/modules/defendant/models/defendant.model.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/migrations/20241015110312-update-defendant.js (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/migrations/20241018105400-update-civil-claimant.js (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/defendant.service.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/dto/createDefendant.dto.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/dto/updateCivilClaimant.dto.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/dto/updateDefendant.dto.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/models/civilClaimant.model.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/models/defendant.model.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/dto/updateSubpoena.dto.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/subpoena.service.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/digital-mailbox-api/src/app/modules/cases/case.service.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/web/src/components/FormProvider/case.graphql (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Advocates/Advocates.strings.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Advocates/SelectCivilClaimantAdvocate.tsx (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Advocates/SelectDefender.tsx (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/web/src/utils/validate.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/xrd-api/src/app/app.service.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
📓 Learnings (2)
apps/judicial-system/api/src/app/modules/defendant/models/civilClaimant.model.ts (1)
Learnt from: gudjong PR: island-is/island.is#16389 File: apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/civilClaimant.service.ts:75-95 Timestamp: 2024-10-17T11:45:23.482Z Learning: The `created` field exists in the `CivilClaimant` model in `civilClaimant.model.ts`.apps/judicial-system/digital-mailbox-api/src/app/modules/cases/case.service.ts (1)
Learnt from: unakb PR: island-is/island.is#16393 File: apps/judicial-system/digital-mailbox-api/src/app/modules/cases/models/subpoena.response.ts:164-169 Timestamp: 2024-10-14T21:34:16.234Z Learning: Ensure that suggested code changes in `subpoena.response.ts` are accurate and necessary, avoiding redundant suggestions.
🔇 Additional comments (42)
apps/judicial-system/backend/migrations/20241018105400-update-civil-claimant.js (2)
2-14: LGTM: Theupfunction is well-implemented.The migration adds the new
is_spokesperson_confirmedcolumn correctly:
- Uses a transaction for data integrity
- Follows naming conventions
- Allows null values as appropriate for an optional field
- Utilizes Sequelize's
queryInterfacecorrectly
15-25: LGTM: Thedownfunction is correctly implemented.The rollback operation:
- Uses a transaction for data integrity
- Correctly removes the added column
- Utilizes Sequelize's
queryInterfaceappropriatelyapps/judicial-system/backend/migrations/20241015110312-update-defendant.js (2)
26-45: LGTM! Proper rollback implementation.The 'down' method correctly implements the removal of the two columns added in the 'up' method. The use of a transaction ensures data integrity during the rollback process.
1-46: Well-structured migration file.This migration file correctly implements the addition of two new columns to the 'defendant' table, aligning with the PR objectives. The use of transactions in both 'up' and 'down' methods ensures data integrity. The implementation follows good practices for database migrations.
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/dto/updateDefendant.dto.ts (1)
111-120: New properties align with PR objectives and follow best practices.The addition of
isDefenderChoiceConfirmedandcaseFilesSharedWithDefenderproperties is consistent with the PR objectives. They allow judges to confirm defender choices and control access to case files. The implementation follows TypeScript and NextJS best practices:
- Proper use of
@IsOptional()and@IsBoolean()decorators for type safety and validation.- Inclusion of
@ApiPropertyOptional()for Swagger documentation.- Consistent naming convention with other properties in the DTO.
- Use of
readonlyfor immutability.These changes enhance the DTO's functionality while maintaining code quality and type safety.
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/models/civilClaimant.model.ts (2)
145-150: LGTM: New propertyisSpokespersonConfirmedadded correctly.The new
isSpokespersonConfirmedproperty is well-implemented:
- It follows the existing pattern for optional boolean fields in the model.
- The use of
@ApiPropertyOptionalis consistent with other optional properties, ensuring proper Swagger documentation.- This addition aligns with the PR objective of allowing judges to confirm spokesperson choices for civil claimants.
145-150: Well-aligned with PR objectives.The addition of the
isSpokespersonConfirmedproperty directly supports the PR's goal of allowing judges to confirm choices in legal cases. This field will enable tracking whether a judge has confirmed the spokesperson for a civil claimant, enhancing control and oversight in the judicial process.apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/models/defendant.model.ts (3)
171-173: LGTM: New propertyisDefenderChoiceConfirmedis well-implemented.The
isDefenderChoiceConfirmedproperty is correctly added as an optional boolean with appropriate decorators for database column and API documentation.
175-177: LGTM: New propertycaseFilesSharedWithDefenderis well-implemented.The
caseFilesSharedWithDefenderproperty is correctly added as an optional boolean with appropriate decorators for database column and API documentation.
170-177: Changes align well with PR objectives and maintain code quality.The addition of
isDefenderChoiceConfirmedandcaseFilesSharedWithDefenderproperties effectively implements the required enhancements for judicial process control. These changes are consistent with the existing code structure and follow TypeScript and NextJS best practices.apps/judicial-system/web/src/components/FormProvider/case.graphql (3)
28-28: LGTM: New fieldisDefenderChoiceConfirmedadded correctly.The new boolean field
isDefenderChoiceConfirmedis appropriately placed in thedefendantssection and aligns with the PR objectives. It will allow judges to confirm the defender choice as described in the PR summary.
345-345: LGTM: New fieldisSpokespersonConfirmedadded correctly.The new boolean field
isSpokespersonConfirmedis appropriately placed in thecivilClaimantssection and aligns with the PR objectives. It will allow judges to confirm the civil claimant's spokesperson choice as described in the PR summary.
Line range hint
1-349: Overall, the changes in this GraphQL query file look good.The new fields (
isDefenderChoiceConfirmed,caseFilesSharedWithDefender, andisSpokespersonConfirmed) have been correctly added to the appropriate sections of the Case query. These additions align well with the PR objectives and will enable the desired functionality for judges to confirm defender and civil claimant choices, as well as manage case file sharing.The changes adhere to GraphQL best practices and maintain the existing structure of the query. The only minor suggestion is to consider consistent naming for boolean fields, but this is a small nitpick in an otherwise well-implemented set of changes.
apps/judicial-system/xrd-api/src/app/app.service.ts (1)
124-128: LGTM: Proper assignment of lawyer details.The population of the
defenderInfoobject with data fromchosenLawyeris implemented correctly. This approach ensures that all relevant defender information is captured when a lawyer is found.apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Advocates/Advocates.strings.ts (16)
28-33: LGTM: Correct message definition forconfirmDefenderChoiceThe message definition follows the correct structure and naming conventions for react-intl. The description provides helpful context for translators.
34-39: LGTM: Correct message definition forchangeDefenderChoiceThe message definition adheres to the react-intl structure and naming conventions. The description is informative for translators.
40-46: LGTM: Well-structured message definition forconfirmSpokespersonChoiceThe message definition is correct and follows react-intl conventions. Notable is the effective use of the select statement for conditional text based on
spokespersonIsLawyer, enhancing the message's flexibility.
47-53: LGTM: Well-structured message definition forchangeSpokespersonChoiceThe message definition adheres to react-intl standards. The select statement is used effectively for conditional text based on
spokespersonIsLawyer, providing appropriate language variants.
117-123: LGTM: Well-structured message definition forconfirmDefenderChoiceModalTitleThe message definition is correct and follows react-intl conventions. The select statement is used effectively to provide different text based on
isDefenderChoiceConfirmed, enhancing the message's versatility.
124-130: LGTM: Correct message definition forconfirmDefenderChoiceModalTextThe message definition adheres to react-intl standards. It effectively uses a placeholder for
defenderName, allowing for dynamic content insertion.
131-136: LGTM: Correct message definition forconfirmDefenderWaivedModalTextThe message definition follows the react-intl structure and naming conventions. The description provides clear context for translators.
137-143: LGTM: Correct message definition forconfirmDefenderDelayModalTextThe message definition adheres to react-intl standards. The description offers clear context for translators.
144-149: LGTM: Correct message definition forchangeDefenderChoiceModalTextThe message definition follows the react-intl structure and naming conventions. The description provides clear context for translators.
151-157: LGTM: Well-structured message definition forconfirmSpokespersonModalTitleThe message definition adheres to react-intl standards. It effectively uses two select statements for conditional text based on
isSpokespersonConfirmedandspokespersonIsLawyer, providing a highly flexible message structure.
158-164: LGTM: Well-structured message definition forconfirmSpokespersonModalTextThe message definition follows react-intl conventions. It effectively uses two select statements for conditional text based on
isSpokespersonConfirmedandspokespersonIsLawyer, allowing for a versatile message that adapts to different scenarios.
165-170: LGTM: Correct message definition forconfirmModalPrimaryButtonTextThe message definition adheres to react-intl standards. The description offers clear context for translators.
171-176: LGTM: Correct message definition forconfirmModalSecondaryButtonTextThe message definition follows the react-intl structure and naming conventions. The description provides clear context for translators.
177-181: LGTM: Correct message definition forshareFilesWithDefenderThe message definition adheres to react-intl standards. The description offers clear context for translators.
182-188: LGTM: Correct message definition forshareFilesWithDefenderTooltipThe message definition follows the react-intl structure and naming conventions. The description provides clear context for translators.
Line range hint
1-188: Overall assessment: Well-structured and consistent message definitionsThe new message definitions in this file enhance the functionality related to confirming and changing defender and spokesperson choices in the judicial system's court indictments module. The additions maintain consistency with existing code and adhere to react-intl and TypeScript best practices. Notable features include:
- Effective use of conditional text using select statements in several messages, providing flexibility for different scenarios.
- Consistent naming conventions and structure throughout the file.
- Clear and informative descriptions for translators.
These changes will improve the user interface's ability to handle various defender and spokesperson selection scenarios, enhancing the overall functionality of the court indictments module.
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/defendant.service.ts (2)
24-24: LGTM: New import added correctly.The
isDistrictCourtUserimport is added correctly and consistently with the existing import structure.
204-213: LGTM with a suggestion for improved authorization.The changes to the
updateByNationalIdmethod align well with the PR objectives. The logic for determiningisDefenderChoiceConfirmedis correct and type-safe.However, consider adding explicit authorization checks to ensure that only users with the appropriate permissions can set
isDefenderChoiceConfirmed. This would enhance security and prevent potential misuse.To verify the usage of
isDistrictCourtUserand potential authorization checks, run the following script:apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Advocates/SelectCivilClaimantAdvocate.tsx (5)
36-36: Modal state initialization is correctThe
displayModalstate is properly initialized usinguseState.
70-70: Disable RadioButtons appropriately when spokesperson is confirmedThe
disabledprop is correctly applied to disable theRadioButtoncomponents whenisSpokespersonConfirmedistrue, preventing further changes.Also applies to: 86-86
140-162: Button logic for confirming spokesperson choice is well-implementedThe button correctly changes its label and color scheme based on
isSpokespersonConfirmed, and the onClick handler properly updates the modal state.
170-180: Ensure null assignments align with API expectationsWhen resetting spokesperson details, multiple fields are set to
null. Verify that the backend API correctly handlesnullvalues for these fields. If the fields are optional and can be omitted, consider usingundefinedinstead.
191-215: Modal component usage is appropriateThe
Modalcomponent is effectively used, with dynamic titles and texts based on the current state, and handles user actions correctly.apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Advocates/SelectDefender.tsx (1)
188-189: Verify the appropriateness of thedestructivecolor schemeUsing a
destructivecolor scheme for the button might imply a critical or irreversible action, which could confuse users if the action is not destructive.Please verify whether changing the defender choice is considered a destructive action. If not, consider using a different color scheme to better reflect the nature of the action.
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/subpoena.service.ts (4)
21-21: ImportisDistrictCourtUserfor role verificationThe addition of the
isDistrictCourtUserimport is appropriate for determining the user's role in the updated logic.
109-109: Handle optionaluserparameter inupdatemethod carefullyThe
updatemethod now includes an optionaluser?: Userparameter. Ensure that all callers of this method provide theuserobject when necessary. Verify that the method correctly handles cases whereuserisundefinedto prevent potential runtime errors.
121-121: IncludeisDefenderChoiceConfirmedin destructuringIncluding
isDefenderChoiceConfirmedin the destructuredupdateobject aligns with the new confirmation logic.
161-161: Ensure consistent update ofisDefenderChoiceConfirmedUpdating
isDefenderChoiceConfirmedin thedefendantUpdateobject withconfirmDefenderChoiceensures that the defender choice confirmation status is accurately reflected based on the user's role.
apps/judicial-system/digital-mailbox-api/src/app/modules/cases/case.service.ts
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Advocates/SelectDefender.tsx
Show resolved
Hide resolved
apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Advocates/SelectDefender.tsx
Show resolved
Hide resolved
apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Advocates/SelectDefender.tsx
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Advocates/SelectDefender.tsx
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Advocates/SelectDefender.tsx
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/subpoena.service.ts
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (3)
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/file/guards/caseFileCategory.ts (1)
67-72: Improved access control logic aligns with PR objectives.The changes to
canDefenceUserViewCaseFileOfIndictmentCasefunction enhance the access control mechanism by using more specific checks:
Defendant.isConfirmedDefenderOfDefendantWithCaseFileAccessCivilClaimant.isConfirmedSpokespersonOfCivilClaimantWithCaseFileAccessThese updates align well with the PR objectives of allowing judges to confirm defender and civil claimant choices. The separate conditional statements maintain readability and adhere to the previously expressed preference.
Consider adding comments to explain the new access control logic, which could help other developers understand the rationale behind these checks.
Also applies to: 79-81
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/filters/case.filter.ts (1)
389-394: LGTM! Consider minor refactoring for consistency.The changes to use
isConfirmedDefenderOfDefendantandisConfirmedSpokespersonOfCivilClaimantalign well with the PR objectives, enhancing the specificity of access checks for defense users. This ensures that only confirmed defenders and spokespersons can access the respective cases.For consistency, consider extracting the
user.nationalIdto a variable at the beginning of the function, similar to how it's done incanDefenceUserAccessRequestCase. This would make the function more readable and easier to maintain. For example:const normalizedAndFormattedNationalId = normalizeAndFormatNationalId(user.nationalId); // Then use normalizedAndFormattedNationalId in the subsequent checksAlso applies to: 400-402
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/guards/rolesRules.ts (1)
292-297: Improved access control for defenders and civil claimant spokespersonsThe changes enhance security by ensuring that only confirmed defenders and spokespersons with appropriate access can view generated PDFs. This aligns well with the PR objectives.
Consider adding error logging for cases where access is denied. This could help in troubleshooting and auditing. For example:
if (!Defendant.isConfirmedDefenderOfDefendantWithCaseFileAccess( user.nationalId, theCase.defendants, )) { console.error(`Access denied for user ${user.nationalId} to case ${theCase.id}`); }Also applies to: 302-305
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (5)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/filters/case.filter.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/guards/rolesRules.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/models/civilClaimant.model.ts (2 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/models/defendant.model.ts (3 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/file/guards/caseFileCategory.ts (1 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/models/civilClaimant.model.ts
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/models/defendant.model.ts
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (3)
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/filters/case.filter.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/guards/rolesRules.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/file/guards/caseFileCategory.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
📓 Learnings (3)
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/filters/case.filter.ts (1)
Learnt from: gudjong PR: island-is/island.is#16389 File: apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/filters/case.filter.ts:407-421 Timestamp: 2024-10-17T11:51:57.129Z Learning: In the `canDefenceUserAccessCase` function (`apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/filters/case.filter.ts`), the `forUpdate` parameter is intentionally not passed to `canDefenceUserAccessRequestCase` because defence users can both read and write request cases, so the `forUpdate` parameter is not needed for request cases.apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/guards/rolesRules.ts (2)
Learnt from: gudjong PR: island-is/island.is#16389 File: apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/test/limitedAccessCaseController/getCaseFilesRecordPdfRolesRules.spec.ts:1-1 Timestamp: 2024-10-17T11:30:12.482Z Learning: The usage of `defenderRule` in the following test files is intentional and should remain unchanged: - `apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/file/test/limitedAccessFileController/createPresignedPostRolesRules.spec.ts` - `apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/file/test/limitedAccessFileController/deleteCaseFileRolesRules.spec.ts` - `apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/file/test/limitedAccessFileController/createCaseFileRolesRules.spec.ts` - `apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/file/test/limitedAccessFileController/getCaseFileSignedUrlRolesRules.spec.ts` - `apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/test/limitedAccessCaseController/getRulingPdfRolesRules.spec.ts` - `apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/test/limitedAccessCaseController/getRequestPdfRolesRules.spec.ts` - `apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/test/limitedAccessCaseController/getCourtRecordPdfRolesRules.spec.ts` - `apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/test/limitedAccessCaseController/getByIdRolesRules.spec.ts` - `apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/test/limitedAccessCaseController/getAllFilesZipRolesRules.spec.ts` - `apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/test/caseController/getAllRolesRules.spec.ts`Learnt from: gudjong PR: island-is/island.is#16389 File: apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/test/limitedAccessCaseController/getIndictmentPdfGuards.spec.ts:24-25 Timestamp: 2024-10-17T11:41:45.565Z Learning: In certain scenarios within the judicial-system backend, the `RolesGuard` may intentionally follow the `CaseExistsGuard` when specific roles rules require the guard order to be reversed, as seen in tests like `getIndictmentPdfGuards.spec.ts`.apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/file/guards/caseFileCategory.ts (2)
Learnt from: oddsson PR: island-is/island.is#16138 File: apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/file/guards/caseFileCategory.ts:74-87 Timestamp: 2024-10-08T15:39:04.351Z Learning: User prefers to keep similar conditional statements separate rather than combining them into a single conditional with logical operators.Learnt from: oddsson PR: island-is/island.is#16138 File: apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/file/guards/caseFileCategory.ts:74-87 Timestamp: 2024-09-24T20:55:56.753Z Learning: User prefers to keep similar conditional statements separate rather than combining them into a single conditional with logical operators.
🔇 Additional comments (1)
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/filters/case.filter.ts (1)
389-394: Verify consistency with related changes in the codebase.The modifications to the
canDefenceUserAccessIndictmentCasefunction enhance the access control for defense users without disrupting the existing logic for other user roles. This improvement aligns well with the PR objectives and maintains the overall structure of the access control system.To ensure consistency across the codebase, please run the following script to verify the related changes:
This script will help verify that the changes in this file are consistent with updates in the
DefendantandCivilClaimantmodels, as well as any related service methods.Also applies to: 400-402
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/defendant.service.ts
Show resolved
Hide resolved
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/dto/createDefendant.dto.ts
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/dto/updateSubpoena.dto.ts
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/subpoena.service.ts
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Advocates/SelectDefender.tsx
Show resolved
Hide resolved
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (3)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/filters/test/defenceUserFilter.spec.ts (2 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/digital-mailbox-api/src/app/modules/cases/case.service.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Advocates/SelectDefender.tsx (4 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
- apps/judicial-system/digital-mailbox-api/src/app/modules/cases/case.service.ts
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (2)
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/filters/test/defenceUserFilter.spec.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Advocates/SelectDefender.tsx (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
📓 Learnings (1)
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/filters/test/defenceUserFilter.spec.ts (1)
Learnt from: gudjong PR: island-is/island.is#16389 File: apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/test/limitedAccessCaseController/getCaseFilesRecordPdfRolesRules.spec.ts:1-1 Timestamp: 2024-10-17T11:30:12.482Z Learning: The usage of `defenderRule` in the following test files is intentional and should remain unchanged: - `apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/file/test/limitedAccessFileController/createPresignedPostRolesRules.spec.ts` - `apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/file/test/limitedAccessFileController/deleteCaseFileRolesRules.spec.ts` - `apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/file/test/limitedAccessFileController/createCaseFileRolesRules.spec.ts` - `apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/file/test/limitedAccessFileController/getCaseFileSignedUrlRolesRules.spec.ts` - `apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/test/limitedAccessCaseController/getRulingPdfRolesRules.spec.ts` - `apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/test/limitedAccessCaseController/getRequestPdfRolesRules.spec.ts` - `apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/test/limitedAccessCaseController/getCourtRecordPdfRolesRules.spec.ts` - `apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/test/limitedAccessCaseController/getByIdRolesRules.spec.ts` - `apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/test/limitedAccessCaseController/getAllFilesZipRolesRules.spec.ts` - `apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/test/caseController/getAllRolesRules.spec.ts`
🔇 Additional comments (5)
apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Advocates/SelectDefender.tsx (1)
166-166: Verify thedisabledCondition for Sharing FilesThe
disabledprop for theCheckboxcomponent checks if bothdefendant.defenderNameanddefendant.defenderEmailare absent:disabled={!defendant.defenderName && !defendant.defenderEmail}Ensure that this condition correctly reflects all scenarios where the defender's contact information might be insufficient for sharing files. If there are cases where a defender might have a
defenderNationalIdwithout a name or email, consider including it in the condition to avoid unintentionally disabling the checkbox.For example:
-disabled={!defendant.defenderName && !defendant.defenderEmail} +disabled={!defendant.defenderName && !defendant.defenderEmail && !defendant.defenderNationalId}Please verify and adjust the condition if necessary.
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/filters/test/defenceUserFilter.spec.ts (4)
206-217: Verify access control for unconfirmed defender assigned to caseIn this test case, a defender is assigned to the case without the
isDefenderChoiceConfirmedflag set totrue, andverifyNoAccess(theCase, user)is called. This correctly tests that unconfirmed defenders should not have access. Please ensure this aligns with the intended access control policies for unconfirmed defenders in indictment cases.
219-230: Confirmed defender access test is accurateThe test case correctly assigns a confirmed defender by setting
isDefenderChoiceConfirmed: trueand usesverifyFullAccess(theCase, user). This appropriately tests that confirmed defenders have full access to the case, aligning with the updated access control logic.
290-306: Verify access restriction for non-confirmed spokespersonIn this test case, a spokesperson is assigned without the
isSpokespersonConfirmedflag set totrue, andverifyNoAccess(theCase, user)is called. This tests that non-confirmed spokespersons should not have access. Please confirm that this behavior matches the intended access control policies for spokespersons.
314-318: Confirmed spokesperson read access test is validThe test accurately represents a confirmed spokesperson by setting
isSpokespersonConfirmed: trueand correctly usesverifyReadAccess(theCase, user). This ensures that confirmed spokespersons are granted read access, consistent with the access control requirements.
apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Advocates/SelectDefender.tsx
Show resolved
Hide resolved
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (3)
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/file/guards/test/limitedAccessViewCaseFileGuard.spec.ts (3)
181-187: LGTM! Consider adding more test cases.The new properties
isDefenderChoiceConfirmedandcaseFilesSharedWithDefenderare correctly added to the test case, reflecting the enhanced access control for defenders. This aligns with the PR objectives.Consider adding additional test cases to cover scenarios where
isDefenderChoiceConfirmedorcaseFilesSharedWithDefenderarefalse, to ensure the guard behaves correctly in all situations.
215-215: LGTM! Consider adding a negative test case.The new property
isSpokespersonConfirmedis correctly added to the test case, reflecting the enhanced access control for spokespersons. This is consistent with the changes for defenders and aligns with the PR objectives.Consider adding a test case where
isSpokespersonConfirmedisfalseto ensure the guard correctly denies access in this scenario.
Line range hint
1-738: Overall, the changes look good and align with the PR objectives.The modifications to the test cases for the
LimitedAccessViewCaseFileGuardaccurately reflect the new access control logic for defenders and spokespersons in indictment cases. The addition ofisDefenderChoiceConfirmed,caseFilesSharedWithDefender, andisSpokespersonConfirmedproperties enhances the specificity of the tests and aligns with the goal of improving judge control over indictment cases.To further improve the test coverage:
- Add test cases where
isDefenderChoiceConfirmedorcaseFilesSharedWithDefenderarefalsefor defenders.- Add a test case where
isSpokespersonConfirmedisfalsefor spokespersons.- Consider adding tests for scenarios where only one of the conditions is met (e.g., defender choice confirmed but case files not shared) to ensure the guard behaves correctly in all situations.
These additional tests will help ensure that the guard correctly handles all possible combinations of the new access control properties.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/file/guards/test/limitedAccessViewCaseFileGuard.spec.ts (2 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (1)
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/file/guards/test/limitedAccessViewCaseFileGuard.spec.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
📓 Learnings (1)
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/file/guards/test/limitedAccessViewCaseFileGuard.spec.ts (4)
Learnt from: gudjong PR: island-is/island.is#16389 File: apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/file/guards/test/limitedAccessViewCaseFileGuard.spec.ts:175-185 Timestamp: 2024-10-17T11:53:19.983Z Learning: In the Jest tests for the `LimitedAccessViewCaseFileGuard` in `apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/file/guards/test/limitedAccessViewCaseFileGuard.spec.ts`, code duplication in the `beforeEach` blocks is acceptable and should remain unchanged.Learnt from: gudjong PR: island-is/island.is#16389 File: apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/test/limitedAccessCaseController/getCaseFilesRecordPdfRolesRules.spec.ts:1-1 Timestamp: 2024-10-17T11:30:12.482Z Learning: The usage of `defenderRule` in the following test files is intentional and should remain unchanged: - `apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/file/test/limitedAccessFileController/createPresignedPostRolesRules.spec.ts` - `apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/file/test/limitedAccessFileController/deleteCaseFileRolesRules.spec.ts` - `apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/file/test/limitedAccessFileController/createCaseFileRolesRules.spec.ts` - `apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/file/test/limitedAccessFileController/getCaseFileSignedUrlRolesRules.spec.ts` - `apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/test/limitedAccessCaseController/getRulingPdfRolesRules.spec.ts` - `apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/test/limitedAccessCaseController/getRequestPdfRolesRules.spec.ts` - `apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/test/limitedAccessCaseController/getCourtRecordPdfRolesRules.spec.ts` - `apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/test/limitedAccessCaseController/getByIdRolesRules.spec.ts` - `apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/test/limitedAccessCaseController/getAllFilesZipRolesRules.spec.ts` - `apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/test/caseController/getAllRolesRules.spec.ts`Learnt from: gudjong PR: island-is/island.is#16389 File: apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/test/limitedAccessCaseController/getIndictmentPdfGuards.spec.ts:24-25 Timestamp: 2024-10-17T11:41:45.565Z Learning: In certain scenarios within the judicial-system backend, the `RolesGuard` may intentionally follow the `CaseExistsGuard` when specific roles rules require the guard order to be reversed, as seen in tests like `getIndictmentPdfGuards.spec.ts`.Learnt from: oddsson PR: island-is/island.is#16463 File: apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/subpoena/test/limitedAccessSubpoenaController/limitedAccessSubpoenaControllerGuards.spec.ts:17-17 Timestamp: 2024-10-21T21:14:47.668Z Learning: In `LimitedAccessSubpoenaController`, `SubpoenaExistsOptionalGuard` is still used on specific endpoints not covered by the test file `limitedAccessSubpoenaControllerGuards.spec.ts`.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 4
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (3)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/defendant.service.ts (2 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/dto/internalUpdateDefendant.dto.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/internalDefendant.controller.ts (2 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/defendant.service.ts
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (2)
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/dto/internalUpdateDefendant.dto.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/internalDefendant.controller.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
🔇 Additional comments (3)
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/internalDefendant.controller.ts (3)
23-23: Good separation of internal and external DTOs!The switch to
InternalUpdateDefendantDtofollows security best practices by clearly separating internal API contracts from external ones. This is particularly important in a judicial system where data access control is critical.
74-74: Verify validation and error handling for sensitive data.While the DTO type change is correct, please ensure:
- The
InternalUpdateDefendantDtoincludes proper validation decorators for the new judge confirmation fields- The Swagger documentation (@ApiOkResponse) reflects the new fields in the response type
- Error cases are handled for invalid confirmation states
Let's verify the DTO implementation:
Line range hint
31-85: Verify judge-specific access control.Since this PR introduces judge confirmation features, consider:
- Adding a specific guard to verify judge permissions for the update endpoint
- Logging the judge's identity when confirmation fields are updated
Let's check for existing judge-related guards:
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/dto/internalUpdateDefendant.dto.ts
Show resolved
Hide resolved
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/dto/internalUpdateDefendant.dto.ts
Show resolved
Hide resolved
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/dto/internalUpdateDefendant.dto.ts
Show resolved
Hide resolved
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/dto/internalUpdateDefendant.dto.ts
Show resolved
Hide resolved
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/defendant/defendant.service.ts
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
I need to add one thing before merging this, so keep open for a little bit longer |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 3
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/filters/cases.filter.ts (2 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/filters/test/cases.filter.spec.ts (2 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (2)
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/filters/cases.filter.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/filters/test/cases.filter.spec.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
📓 Learnings (2)
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/filters/cases.filter.ts (1)
Learnt from: gudjong PR: island-is/island.is#16389 File: apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/filters/case.filter.ts:407-421 Timestamp: 2024-10-17T11:51:57.129Z Learning: In the `canDefenceUserAccessCase` function (`apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/filters/case.filter.ts`), the `forUpdate` parameter is intentionally not passed to `canDefenceUserAccessRequestCase` because defence users can both read and write request cases, so the `forUpdate` parameter is not needed for request cases.apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/filters/test/cases.filter.spec.ts (1)
Learnt from: gudjong PR: island-is/island.is#16389 File: apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/test/limitedAccessCaseController/getCaseFilesRecordPdfRolesRules.spec.ts:1-1 Timestamp: 2024-10-17T11:30:12.482Z Learning: The usage of `defenderRule` in the following test files is intentional and should remain unchanged: - `apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/file/test/limitedAccessFileController/createPresignedPostRolesRules.spec.ts` - `apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/file/test/limitedAccessFileController/deleteCaseFileRolesRules.spec.ts` - `apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/file/test/limitedAccessFileController/createCaseFileRolesRules.spec.ts` - `apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/file/test/limitedAccessFileController/getCaseFileSignedUrlRolesRules.spec.ts` - `apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/test/limitedAccessCaseController/getRulingPdfRolesRules.spec.ts` - `apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/test/limitedAccessCaseController/getRequestPdfRolesRules.spec.ts` - `apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/test/limitedAccessCaseController/getCourtRecordPdfRolesRules.spec.ts` - `apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/test/limitedAccessCaseController/getByIdRolesRules.spec.ts` - `apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/test/limitedAccessCaseController/getAllFilesZipRolesRules.spec.ts` - `apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/test/caseController/getAllRolesRules.spec.ts`
🔇 Additional comments (2)
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/filters/cases.filter.ts (1)
286-286: Verify the impact of new confirmation requirements.The addition of
is_defender_choice_confirmedandis_spokesperson_confirmedconditions aligns with the PR objectives. However, let's verify that existing defenders won't lose access to their cases.Also applies to: 295-295
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/filters/test/cases.filter.spec.ts (1)
462-462: Verify the impact of new confirmation flags on existing cases.The addition of
is_defender_choice_confirmedandis_spokesperson_confirmedconditions might affect access to existing cases where these flags are not set.Let's check if there are any existing cases that might be affected:
Also applies to: 471-471
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/filters/cases.filter.ts
Show resolved
Hide resolved
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/case/filters/test/cases.filter.spec.ts
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Dómstóll geti skipað verjendur og réttargæslumenn/lögmenn
Vantar val að geta deilt gögnum með verjanda hjá dómnum
What
Why
Screenshots / Gifs
Attach Screenshots / Gifs to help reviewers understand the scope of the pull request
Checklist:
Summary by CodeRabbit
Release Notes
New Features
Bug Fixes
Documentation
These updates enhance user experience by providing clearer confirmations and improved data handling related to legal representation.