Nikodem Graczewski

Yep

Yep

Perhaps we could use the "associations" term? It was mentioned in one of the comments to the mockups.

Perhaps we could use the "associations" term? It was mentioned in one of the comments to the mockups.

This is like adding 3 lines of code at best. Would probably take more time to write the ticket for that than to fix this.

This is like adding 3 lines of code at best. Would probably take more time to write the ticket for that than to fix this.

OLMIS-4251: Updated invalid JSDoc

OLMIS-4251: Reworked unit tests for SelectProductsModalController to not define any describe-scope variables

Then that will be the point when we should make it global.

Then that will be the point when we should make it global.

It is only used in one place at the moment so we don't really need it globally (YAGNI).

It is only used in one place at the moment so we don't really need it globally (YAGNI).

Yep

Yep

That's because the dependencies are lacking some of their dependencies (this doesn't show up on the test server as we're loading those modules anyway and they are visible for every other module). T...

That's because the dependencies are lacking some of their dependencies (this doesn't show up on the test server as we're loading those modules anyway and they are visible for every other module). This is the list of dependencies that should be present:

  • admin-role-form on on admin-role-list
  • admin-role-list on openlmis-admin
  • openlmis-admin on openlmis-main-state


If those are present all we need here is the last module. The test is actually telling us that the module is using stuff that is not available to it.

Łukasz Lewczyński CC Chongsun Ahn The entries seem pretty generic... I'm having trouble grasping what they are actually representing. The only name for them I found at one of the eLMIS screenshot i...

Łukasz Lewczyński
CC Chongsun Ahn
The entries seem pretty generic... I'm having trouble grasping what they are actually representing. The only name for them I found at one of the eLMIS screenshot is "Subscription", but I'm not sure about that. Perhaps a simple "Assignment"? Anyway, we should definitely rename it to the picked name so the naming is ubiquitous.

Definitely not! https://review.openlmis.org/static/ogdo0b/2static/images/wiki/icons/emoticons/biggrin.gif Forgot about them!

Definitely not! Forgot about them!

In eLMIS the Supply Partner also had Name and Code, should we add them Chongsun Ahn?

In eLMIS the Supply Partner also had Name and Code, should we add them Chongsun Ahn?

The name might be a little misleading. Wouldn't it make more sense to name it something telling us we're doing a request here?

The name might be a little misleading. Wouldn't it make more sense to name it something telling us we're doing a request here?

I think that this hides an important problem (201 being returned before the object is created). This information should definitely be propagated up and investigated.

I think that this hides an important problem (201 being returned before the object is created). This information should definitely be propagated up and investigated.

It's safe to look at this file as completely new, to be honest.

It's safe to look at this file as completely new, to be honest.

same here

same here

same here

same here

We're actually adding them here.

We're actually adding them here.

These methods will work as intended (thanks to the .andCallThrough) so there is no need to multiply the build methods for spy and non-spy ones (YAGNI).

These methods will work as intended (thanks to the .andCallThrough) so there is no need to multiply the build methods for spy and non-spy ones (YAGNI).

More like each time I need a spy on a method.

More like each time I need a spy on a method.

This could use a Javadoc as the other newly-added exception have.

This could use a Javadoc as the other newly-added exception have.

Does this mean we will be able to update with this method aswell?

Does this mean we will be able to update with this method aswell?

Nevermind, I can see now.

Nevermind, I can see now.

Do we need this?

Do we need this?