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

Update the workflow of archiving version from version details page #3278

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 9, 2024

Conversation

ppadti
Copy link
Contributor

@ppadti ppadti commented Oct 1, 2024

Closes: RHOAIENG-13063

Description

This PR aims to update the workflow of archiving version from version details page. Now if we archive a version from version details page it will redirect to versions list page

How Has This Been Tested?

Archive a version from the version details page and see that navigates to versions list page after archiving a version.

Test Impact

NA, updated the navigation after archive.

Request review criteria:

Self checklist (all need to be checked):

  • The developer has manually tested the changes and verified that the changes work
  • Testing instructions have been added in the PR body (for PRs involving changes that are not immediately obvious).
  • The developer has added tests or explained why testing cannot be added (unit or cypress tests for related changes)

If you have UI changes:

  • Included any necessary screenshots or gifs if it was a UI change.
  • Included tags to the UX team if it was a UI/UX change.

After the PR is posted & before it merges:

  • The developer has tested their solution on a cluster by using the image produced by the PR to main

Copy link

codecov bot commented Oct 1, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 84.74%. Comparing base (25e1a44) to head (09c0aba).
Report is 4 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #3278      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   84.77%   84.74%   -0.03%     
==========================================
  Files        1309     1309              
  Lines       29292    29292              
  Branches     7955     7955              
==========================================
- Hits        24831    24824       -7     
- Misses       4461     4468       +7     
Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
...ersionDetails/ModelVersionDetailsHeaderActions.tsx 85.29% <100.00%> (ø)

... and 6 files with indirect coverage changes


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 25e1a44...09c0aba. Read the comment docs.

Copy link
Contributor

@manaswinidas manaswinidas left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/lgtm

Works as expected. After archiving a version, the URL takes me to versions list page instead of the archived version page.

@YuliaKrimerman
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm - Verified locally, works as intended.

Copy link
Contributor

@mturley mturley left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, thanks @ppadti

Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Oct 9, 2024

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: manaswinidas, mturley

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the approved label Oct 9, 2024
@openshift-merge-bot openshift-merge-bot bot merged commit 998d320 into opendatahub-io:main Oct 9, 2024
8 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants