feat: 1580 list favorite activities for consep #1771
Conversation
xiaopeng0202
requested review from
mgaseta,
DerekRoberts and
SLDonnelly
as code owners
xiaopeng0202
changed the title
xiaopeng0202
changed the title
| public record FavouriteActivityCreateDto(@NotNull String activity) {} | ||
| public record FavouriteActivityCreateDto( | ||
| @NotNull String activity, | ||
| @Schema(description = "Indicates whether this activity is a Consep", defaultValue = "false") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think you meant: "Indicates whether this activity is from Consep" :)
| ALTER TABLE | ||
| spar.favourite_activity | ||
| ADD | ||
| COLUMN is_consep BOOLEAN DEFAULT FALSE NOT NULL; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Git is complaining about a missing empty line at the end of the file.
| @@ -165,4 +165,4 @@ services: | |||
| ORACLE_SYNC_USER: ${ORACLE_SYNC_USER:-proxy_fsa_spar_read_only_user} | |||
| depends_on: | |||
| database: | |||
| condition: service_started | |||
| condition: service_started | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Git is complaining about a missing empty line at the end of the file.
| isConsep: boolean; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| const FavouriteActivities: React.FC<FavouriteActivitiesProps> = ({ isConsep }) => { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why using React.FC here? We normally don't use it on our "common" components...
| @@ -65,11 +73,14 @@ const FavouriteActivities = () => { | |||
| description="You can favourite your most used | |||
| activities by clicking on the heart icon inside each page" | |||
| /> | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We need to adjust this section accordingly with the new design for consep "empty favourites".
| key={favObject.type} | ||
| favObject={favObject} | ||
| /> | ||
| ) : favActQuery.data.filter((fav) => fav.isConsep === isConsep).map((favObject) => ( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why is this filter needed here? Won't this impact SPAR's favourite activities?
| } | ||
| }); | ||
|
|
||
| const thisFavAct = favActQuery?.data?.filter((act) => act.type === activity)[0]; | ||
| const thisFavAct = favActQuery?.data?.filter( | ||
| (act) => act.type === activity && act.isConsep === isConsep |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why is it necessary to check if the activity is from CONSEP here? Shouldn't it be enough to check the type only?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think the folder name should be all in lower case, to maintain the pattern we are using. And maybe a task for later, but now that we are starting CONSEP, we can try to re-arrange our project's folder organization.
Description
Closes #1580
Changelog
New
How was this tested?
What gif/image best describes this PR or how it makes you feel?
Thanks for the PR!
Deployments, as required, will be available below:
Please create PRs in draft mode. Mark as ready to enable:
After merge, new images are deployed in: