Skip to content

Comments

Implimented a fix and added unit tests#1244

Open
interfinityOfficial wants to merge 1 commit intomainfrom
953-declined-vip-request-asking-for-an-n-number
Open

Implimented a fix and added unit tests#1244
interfinityOfficial wants to merge 1 commit intomainfrom
953-declined-vip-request-asking-for-an-n-number

Conversation

@interfinityOfficial
Copy link
Collaborator

Summary of Changes

When editing a declined VIP booking, the form used FormContextLevel.EDIT instead of VIP, so the N-number field was shown and required. The fix treats the booking as VIP when the form context is EDIT and the loaded booking’s origin is BookingOrigin.VIP, so the N-number field stays hidden for VIP edits.

Checklist

  • I checked for existing implementations and confirmed there is no duplication
  • I tested this feature locally
  • I had Copilot review the PR and incorporated feedback (or explained why not)
  • I confirmed there are no conflicts
  • I confirmed my PR passed all tests
  • I added or updated unit tests (or explained why not)
  • I attached screenshots or a video demonstrating the feature
  • I requested a code review from at least one other teammate

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

BUG: On Dev a VIP request that is DECLINED and Edited by the requester is asking for an N-number as a required field.

1 participant