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

Create Sprint 101 Summary #3052

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jul 16, 2024
Merged

Create Sprint 101 Summary #3052

merged 2 commits into from
Jul 16, 2024

Conversation

robgendron
Copy link

Summary of Changes

Provide a brief summary of changes
Pull request closes #_

How to Test

List the steps to test the PR
These steps are generic, please adjust as necessary.

cd tdrs-frontend && docker-compose -f docker-compose.yml -f docker-compose.local.yml up -d
cd tdrs-backend && docker-compose -f docker-compose.yml -f docker-compose.local.yml up -d 
  1. Open http://localhost:3000/ and sign in.
  2. Proceed with functional tests as described herein.
  3. Test steps should be captured in the demo GIF(s) and/or screenshots below.

Demo GIF(s) and screenshots for testing procedure

Deliverables

More details on how deliverables herein are assessed included here.

Deliverable 1: Accepted Features

Checklist of ACs:

  • [insert ACs here]
  • lfrohlich and/or adpennington confirmed that ACs are met.

Deliverable 2: Tested Code

  • Are all areas of code introduced in this PR meaningfully tested?
    • If this PR introduces backend code changes, are they meaningfully tested?
    • If this PR introduces frontend code changes, are they meaningfully tested?
  • Are code coverage minimums met?
    • Frontend coverage: [insert coverage %] (see CodeCov Report comment in PR)
    • Backend coverage: [insert coverage %] (see CodeCov Report comment in PR)

Deliverable 3: Properly Styled Code

  • Are backend code style checks passing on CircleCI?
  • Are frontend code style checks passing on CircleCI?
  • Are code maintainability principles being followed?

Deliverable 4: Accessible

  • Does this PR complete the epic?
  • Are links included to any other gov-approved PRs associated with epic?
  • Does PR include documentation for Raft's a11y review?
  • Did automated and manual testing with iamjolly and ttran-hub using Accessibility Insights reveal any errors introduced in this PR?

Deliverable 5: Deployed

  • Was the code successfully deployed via automated CircleCI process to development on Cloud.gov?

Deliverable 6: Documented

  • Does this PR provide background for why coding decisions were made?
  • If this PR introduces backend code, is that code easy to understand and sufficiently documented, both inline and overall?
  • If this PR introduces frontend code, is that code easy to understand and sufficiently documented, both inline and overall?
  • If this PR introduces dependencies, are their licenses documented?
  • Can reviewer explain and take ownership of these elements presented in this code review?

Deliverable 7: Secure

  • Does the OWASP Scan pass on CircleCI?
  • Do manual code review and manual testing detect any new security issues?
  • If new issues detected, is investigation and/or remediation plan documented?

Deliverable 8: User Research

Research product(s) clearly articulate(s):

  • the purpose of the research
  • methods used to conduct the research
  • who participated in the research
  • what was tested and how
  • impact of research on TDP
  • (if applicable) final design mockups produced for TDP development

@ADPennington
Copy link
Collaborator

@robgendron can you please assign reviewers to this PR?

@ADPennington ADPennington added raft review This issue is ready for raft review and removed QASP Review labels Jul 2, 2024
@robgendron
Copy link
Author

@robgendron can you please assign reviewers to this PR?

Added you and @lfrohlich as reviewers.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Jul 2, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 93.02%. Comparing base (05dbc46) to head (be7aaa8).
Report is 2 commits behind head on develop.

Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop    #3052      +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage    93.11%   93.02%   -0.09%     
===========================================
  Files          276      277       +1     
  Lines         7346     7403      +57     
  Branches       651      655       +4     
===========================================
+ Hits          6840     6887      +47     
- Misses         404      414      +10     
  Partials       102      102              
Flag Coverage Δ
dev-backend 93.09% <ø> (-0.10%) ⬇️
dev-frontend 92.60% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.


Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 66542e8...be7aaa8. Read the comment docs.

### Completed/Merged

* [#2980 As a developer I want to test django-508 repo](https://app.zenhub.com/workspaces/sprint-board-5f18ab06dfd91c000f7e682e/issues/gh/raft-tech/tanf-app/2980)
* [#2892 Correct misleading error message for unaligned reporting year/q against header year/q](https://app.zenhub.com/workspaces/sprint-board-5f18ab06dfd91c000f7e682e/issues/gh/raft-tech/tanf-app/2892)
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@robgendron @raftmsohani i think i missed why this has closed. its still an issue.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

since i raised this question, we decided to close #2892 and open a new bug ticket to address this @robgendron

Copy link
Collaborator

@ADPennington ADPennington left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@robgendron this is in good shape. just had one question regarding #2892

Copy link
Collaborator

@ADPennington ADPennington left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

👍🏾

@ADPennington
Copy link
Collaborator

@robgendron did dev and ux team review this? this can merge after they have signed off.

@robgendron
Copy link
Author

@robgendron did dev and ux team review this? this can merge after they have signed off.

Both have - we used Gitbook's review function for this sprint summary. We decided to use PRs moving forward though.

@andrew-jameson andrew-jameson merged commit ff50f9e into develop Jul 16, 2024
15 checks passed
@andrew-jameson andrew-jameson deleted the new branch July 16, 2024 20:28
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
raft review This issue is ready for raft review Ready to Merge
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants