-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 56
fix(OS report): Do not apply Advisory filter by default #2335
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
Conversation
Reviewer's GuideThis PR expands the OS exposure report’s advisory filter to include both true and false by default, and improves code clarity by removing redundant comments and simplifying the nested JSX rendering logic in OsExposureReportModal.js. Entity relationship diagram for advisory_available filter changeerDiagram
FILTER_DATA {
impact string
advisory_available string
}
FILTER_DATA ||--o{ ADVISORY_OPTION : includes
ADVISORY_OPTION {
value string
}
%% advisory_available now includes both 'true' and 'false' by default
File-Level Changes
Tips and commandsInteracting with Sourcery
Customizing Your ExperienceAccess your dashboard to:
Getting Help
|
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.
Hey there - I've reviewed your changes - here's some feedback:
- Review the nested map logic in the JSX to ensure your arrow functions with braces are returning the expected elements (or switch to concise bodies for implicit returns).
- Consider extracting the multi-level exposureMap mapping into a separate component or helper function to improve readability and maintainability.
- Double-check that defaulting advisory_available to both 'true' and 'false' aligns with the intended filter behavior and doesn’t introduce unintended data in the report.
Prompt for AI Agents
Please address the comments from this code review:
## Overall Comments
- Review the nested map logic in the JSX to ensure your arrow functions with braces are returning the expected elements (or switch to concise bodies for implicit returns).
- Consider extracting the multi-level exposureMap mapping into a separate component or helper function to improve readability and maintainability.
- Double-check that defaulting advisory_available to both 'true' and 'false' aligns with the intended filter behavior and doesn’t introduce unintended data in the report.
Help me be more useful! Please click 👍 or 👎 on each comment and I'll use the feedback to improve your reviews.
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.
LGTM, works as expected! Thank you
/retest |
0cf1551
to
0a50a87
Compare
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #2335 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 59.47% 57.38% -2.09%
==========================================
Files 151 151
Lines 4303 4301 -2
Branches 1377 1389 +12
==========================================
- Hits 2559 2468 -91
- Misses 1574 1656 +82
- Partials 170 177 +7
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:
|
https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHINENG-19899