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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

case workflow role for issue_order action and next state for submit_c… #1659

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: develop
Choose a base branch
from
Open

case workflow role for issue_order action and next state for submit_c… #1659

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
4 changes: 2 additions & 2 deletions docs/Case/workflow/case-workflowConfig.json
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -24,7 +24,7 @@
},
{
"action": "SUBMIT_CASE",
"nextState": "PENDING_PAYMENT",
"nextState": "PENDING_E-SIGN",
"roles": [
"CASE_CREATOR"
]
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -217,7 +217,7 @@
"action": "ISSUE_ORDER",
"nextState": "PENDING_RESPONSE",
"roles": [
"CASE_RESPONDER"
"CASE_APPROVER"
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Tip

Codebase Verification

Inconsistent Role Update Detected

There is still an occurrence of the "CASE_RESPONDER" role in the docs/Case/workflow/case-workflowConfig.json file. Please review this reference to ensure that all instances of the role have been updated to "CASE_APPROVER" where necessary, particularly in relation to the "ISSUE_ORDER" action. This will help maintain consistency in the workflow configuration.

  • Location: docs/Case/workflow/case-workflowConfig.json
Analysis chain

LGTM, but verify the role usage.

The change to assign the "CASE_APPROVER" role to the "ISSUE_ORDER" action is approved. It aligns with the redefinition of responsibilities mentioned in the PR summary.

However, ensure that this change is thoroughly tested to confirm that it behaves as expected and that all references to the "CASE_RESPONDER" role for the "ISSUE_ORDER" action have been updated.

Run the following script to verify the role usage:

Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify all references to the "CASE_RESPONDER" role for the "ISSUE_ORDER" action have been updated.

# Test: Search for the role usage in the codebase. Expect: No occurrences of the old role.
rg --type-add 'config:*.json' --type config $'"ISSUE_ORDER"' | rg $'"CASE_RESPONDER"'

Length of output: 85

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify all references to the "CASE_RESPONDER" role in the codebase.

# Test: Search for any occurrences of the "CASE_RESPONDER" role in the codebase.
rg '"CASE_RESPONDER"'

Length of output: 116

]
},
{
Expand Down