feat: preselect jurisdiction#5582
Conversation
✅ Deploy Preview for bloom-angelopolis canceled.
|
✅ Deploy Preview for bloom-flagly canceled.
|
✅ Deploy Preview for partners-bloom-dev ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration. |
✅ Deploy Preview for bloom-lakeview ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration. |
✅ Deploy Preview for bloom-exygy-dev ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration. |
✅ Deploy Preview for bloom-public-seeds ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration. |
ludtkemorgan
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Love this change! And I hope that we can go forward with this as it will save us a lot of headaches. Especially around some of the feature flags we have setup for Detroit.
I do think we need to talk to the Doorway team before we could proceed with this though. Their setup is to have 1 jurisdiction per county in the system but every jurisdiction has essentially the same settings. So for example if we turn on a feature flag for one jurisdiction we will be turning it on for all of them. It is less important in that setup to pre-select the jurisdiction and I know on a couple of occasions they have switched the jurisdiction after creating it. Either because they accidentally selected the wrong county or they wanted to create it before the new county existed. That second case shouldn't happen again unless they expand to more counties which I don't anticipate them doing. We'll just want to touch base with them to see if that limitation would cause any issues.
mcgarrye
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Love this so much. Was not able to review all of the code changes but did test the functionality locally and it looks great!
My wonder for the future would be roll out. This cannot be feature flagged as it is cross jurisdictional. Would we just roll it out all at once or would we need an env var?
283b782 to
fccbeff
Compare
|
Okidokie this is ready for review! Has been run past Sarah, Kathy for Doorway, and Em. We would just roll this out everywhere and not feature flag as that could get gnarly. And the modal now has copy that the jurisdiction cannot be changed later. |
ludtkemorgan
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good. Just minor comments/questions
|
@emilyjablonski I forgot to add one more comment. There is a scenario that I don't know how we should handle but I don't know how much weight we should put on it:
I don't anticipate this happening, but there is a small chance that somebody might accidentally edit the url and not realize it. The same issue happens if you have a jurisdiction id in the url that is for a jurisdiction you don't have access to. This one I'm even less concerned by. One option is to throw up a warning or send them to the listings page if the jurisdiction does not load |
|
@ludtkemorgan Made the updates, and added a check in case the jurisdiction doesn't exist in the user's profile, that will redirect back to the home page to mirror the check if the query doesn't exist |
5727db2 to
0076262
Compare
This PR addresses #2142 #3182
Description
Requires pre-selecting a jurisdiction in a dialog before being able to visit the add listing page if you have access to multiple jurisdictions.
How Can This Be Tested/Reviewed?
listings/adddirectly - it must have a jurisdiction id parameter, and should redirect to the home pageJurisdiction selection dialog:

A new read-only section was added at the top of the edit page that mirrors a section that already exists at the top of the view page - "Listing data". The jurisdiction does not appear at all if a user only has access to one jurisdiction.


One jurisdiction:
Multiple jurisdictions:
Author Checklist:
yarn generate:clientand/or created a migration when requiredReview Process: