-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 109
[METADATA][ADDITIONAL_FIELDS] Implémentation du système de champs additionnels pour les cadres d'acquisition #3744
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
base: develop
Are you sure you want to change the base?
[METADATA][ADDITIONAL_FIELDS] Implémentation du système de champs additionnels pour les cadres d'acquisition #3744
Conversation
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## develop #3744 +/- ##
===========================================
+ Coverage 84.48% 84.59% +0.10%
===========================================
Files 133 133
Lines 10361 10374 +13
===========================================
+ Hits 8754 8776 +22
+ Misses 1607 1598 -9
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
598330d to
31278cb
Compare
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.
Ca me semble bien dans le fonctionnement ! En plus, ça montre que le système de champs additionnels s'intègre facilement côté backend mais aussi frontend !
Toutefois, la création d'une nouvelle colonne est à mon sens inutile car une colonne existante a été créée à ce dessin #3422. Il faudra aussi ajouter des tests côtés backend pour tester les champs additionnels.
Enfin, quelques broutilles sur les choix de nommages.
53aff95 to
5f9ac34
Compare
backend/geonature/migrations/versions/1f223c509a80_add_additional_fields_for_af.py
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
5f9ac34 to
53add31
Compare
|
En effet, le champs |
53add31 to
ec22f56
Compare
Ok, je comprends mieux, merci pour l'explication ! |
Features: - AF additional fields: able define additional fields, for acquisition frameworks, from GN backoffice admin: add an object 'METADATA_CADRE_ACQUISITION' in `gn_permissions.t_objects` that can be used, through GN config - Set by default in GN config this new object and the module 'METADATA' as implemented for additional fields // `config_schema.py` - AF form: able provide additional data, based on configured additional fields, in create-or-update acquisition framework form - AF card: display additional data, based on configured additional fields, in acquisition framework card - Default config example: - Complete `default_config.toml.example` with missing section `[ADDITIONAL_FIELDS]` Informations: - Use existing field `gn_meta.t_acquisition_frameworks.additional_data` Ref #2745
ec22f56 to
d2c6c74
Compare
Add additional_data to the acquisition framework "af_1" so as to cover additional_data section in endpoint "gn_meta.get_export_pdf_acquisition_frameworks", through existing test function `test_get_export_pdf_acquisition_frameworks`
48110b7 to
f52121a
Compare
Add tests and modify an existing one to add coverage for "gn_commons._get_additional_fields" function: - Filter-by-`id_dataset`-parameter code - Filter-by-`object_code`-parameter code, for when it the parameter a strictly-longer-than-1-list
f52121a to
d45eff1
Compare
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.
Encore quelques trucs mais on est bien :)
531b47f to
aa8d430
Compare
d814159 to
c2e6e46
Compare
Several executions of `cy.pause()` unwishingly committed in a4e6e72#diff-baf651828980696c20d86295e86660fcf210eca06855bad4844062b3e758443fR310-R321
56b0974 to
7bea1a8
Compare
7bea1a8 to
81757f0
Compare
a54915d to
b2be7a7
Compare
83eb8e9 to
fe92c31
Compare
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.
Les tests frontends échouent. Pas sur de la nouvelle branche pour les champs additionnels... il y a peut-être une stratégie plus importante sur la ou les branches dédiées aux tests E2E. A discuter.
Sinon, fonctionnellement ça marche bien de mon côté.
| geonature install-gn-module contrib/gn_module_occhab OCCHAB --build=false --upgrade-db=false | ||
| geonature install-gn-module contrib/gn_module_validation VALIDATION --build=false --upgrade-db=false | ||
| geonature db upgrade occtax-samples-test@head | ||
| geonature db upgrade cypress-samples-test@head |
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.
ça pose question... pourquoi ne pas ajouter aussi occhab-samples@head, import-samples@head dans le depends on ? 🤔
Dans la continuité des travaux de #1363 qui avaient notamment permis la gestion des champs additionnels en BDD et l'implémentation pour le module OCCTAX.