-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 733
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
Update Exam model with V3 question_sources, update relevant JS utils #11025
Update Exam model with V3 question_sources, update relevant JS utils #11025
Conversation
Build Artifacts
|
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.
One possible oversight from the spec review.
description: '', | ||
resource_pool: [], | ||
questions: expectedSources.sort(), | ||
learners_see_fixed_order: true, |
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.
Worth adding another test that ensures that this gets set to false
if the exam is set to false
?
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.
I don't see this additional test yet - if we add that, we should be good to merge.
Summary
Cohacked on w/ @thanksameeelian - adds commentary defining a new
question_sources
architecture for the Exam model (V3) and updates the default value for thedata_model_version
property to3
and includes the generated migration.Updates the
kolibri/core/assets/src/exams/utils.js
file so that it remains backward compatible while also providing a function to be used in our new work using the V3 data structure.References
Closes #11002
Reviewer guidance
Nothing to manually test beside anything you can think of in Kolibri that might rely on getting V2 data structures so that we're sure of the backward compatibility measures working. @thanksameeelian and I looked at it and saw no issues.
As for the code - anything we've missed?
Testing checklist
PR process
Reviewer checklist
yarn
andpip
)