-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 45
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
fix(RHINENG-3106): properly apply default filters in CVEs and SystemsCVEs pages #2124
Merged
Merged
Changes from 7 commits
Commits
Show all changes
8 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
9a81065
fix(RHINENG-3106): properly apply default filters in CVEs and Systems…
mkholjuraev bc327e4
chore: refactor CVEs component modals, cleanup state management
mkholjuraev 7cd2565
chore: fix tests
mkholjuraev c656c06
chore: fix cy tests
mkholjuraev 71bcd6c
Update src/Components/SmartComponents/CVEs/CVEs.js
mkholjuraev 88144c8
chore: adopt PR suggestions
mkholjuraev b877d16
fix(RHINENG-3106): show or hide the advisory filter according to api …
mkholjuraev 0d49c07
chore: prever userEvent over fireEvent
mkholjuraev File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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.
It feels like TestWrapper and ComponentWithContext both deal with the same problem: render a component with the necessary providers and contexts. We have to stop duplicating these two components and just stick to only one. I see that TestWrapper doesn't support initialEntries: let's perhaps extend it and keep the usage of it here in this test file?
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.
I would remove TestWrapper. Because
ComponentWithContext
follows the conventions that we have in other apps as well. That is why, I replaced TestWrapper with ComponentWithContext. Let's proceed with the review of this PR, I will, first of all, push the component into FEC so that we can share it among apps, and then adopt it in the vuln app in the next PR.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.
Yes, I agree that
TestWrapper
is the better name for the component rather thanComponentWithContext
. While pushing to FEC, I will keep this in mind.