-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 61
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
Adding all to req operation type enum #1842
Conversation
Signed-off-by: muralibasani <[email protected]>
Thank you! This will simplify a lot of the front end code I think. However, it also means that we need to do the front-end changes on this PR as well. The CI failures indicate why, I think ^^ The types can be patched easily, but there are some changes to be made to the underlying logic as well, and I think it's a good idea to make this PR a contained package. I can push additional commits once the backend changes have been reviewed and approved. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Anderson <[email protected]>
@muralibasani this commit should address all the FE issues a4c2955 However, I noticed some significant API misconduct: adding Screen.Recording.2023-10-05.at.16.11.50.movScreen.Recording.2023-10-05.at.16.26.15.mov |
I also requested a review from @programmiri because I might have overlooked a spot where this change to |
Signed-off-by: muralibasani <[email protected]>
@muralibasani I think the commit ea3e3d6 fixed the issue I mentioned, thank you! I would still wait on a review by @programmiri to merge though ^^ |
@@ -227,7 +227,7 @@ public Iterable<AclRequests> findAclRequestsByExample( | |||
if (requestor != null && !requestor.isEmpty()) { | |||
request.setRequestor(requestor); | |||
} | |||
if (requestOperationType != null) { | |||
if (requestOperationType != null && !requestOperationType.value.equalsIgnoreCase("all")) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Nitpick but "all" should probably be repalced by requestOperationType != RequestOperationType.ALL
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@aindriu-aiven updated.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
Linked issue
Resolves: #900
What kind of change does this PR introduce?
What is the current behavior?
Describe the state of the application before this PR. Illustrations appreciated (videos, gifs, screenshots).
Currently requestOperationType does not have ALL enum. So to fetch all requests, blank is sent from FE. Rather it is better to send ALL
What is the new behavior?
Describe the state of the application after this PR. Illustrations appreciated (videos, gifs, screenshots).
Adding ALL to the enum requestOperationType
Other information:
Additional changes, explanations of the approach taken, unresolved issues, necessary follow ups, etc.
Please check if the PR fulfills these requirements