Skip to content
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

Duplicate connection page UI #3059

Merged

Conversation

emilys314
Copy link
Contributor

@emilys314 emilys314 commented Aug 2, 2024

Towards https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHOAIENG-10314

Description

Adds the UI portion of the create / duplicate connection type page. The jira issue is for the duplicate page, but a lot of the create page is already made since it's dependent.

image
image
image

Error state:
image

How Has This Been Tested?

Manually on local. Start the front end and back end. Then go to the /connectionTypes/create or /connectionTypes/duplicate/<name> routes.

/duplicate requires an existing connection type. So you can go to /create and Make one first.

Test Impact

Cypress tests were added for create and duplicate pages.

Request review criteria:

Self checklist (all need to be checked):

  • The developer has manually tested the changes and verified that the changes work
  • Commits have been squashed into descriptive, self-contained units of work (e.g. 'WIP' and 'Implements feedback' style messages have been removed)
  • Testing instructions have been added in the PR body (for PRs involving changes that are not immediately obvious).
  • The developer has added tests or explained why testing cannot be added (unit or cypress tests for related changes)

If you have UI changes:

  • Included any necessary screenshots or gifs if it was a UI change.
  • Included tags to the UX team if it was a UI/UX change.

After the PR is posted & before it merges:

  • The developer has tested their solution on a cluster by using the image produced by the PR to main

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the do-not-merge/work-in-progress This PR is in WIP state label Aug 2, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Aug 2, 2024

Skipping CI for Draft Pull Request.
If you want CI signal for your change, please convert it to an actual PR.
You can still manually trigger a test run with /test all

@emilys314 emilys314 force-pushed the duplicate-connection-type-page branch 2 times, most recently from 1fdaa58 to 55b73d3 Compare August 5, 2024 21:27
@emilys314 emilys314 marked this pull request as ready for review August 5, 2024 22:04
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress This PR is in WIP state label Aug 5, 2024
@emilys314 emilys314 force-pushed the duplicate-connection-type-page branch 4 times, most recently from f7a8c56 to a842c0c Compare August 7, 2024 14:58
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the do-not-merge/hold This PR is hold for some reason label Aug 7, 2024
@emilys314 emilys314 force-pushed the duplicate-connection-type-page branch from a842c0c to 9661df9 Compare August 7, 2024 15:24
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the do-not-merge/hold This PR is hold for some reason label Aug 7, 2024
@emilys314 emilys314 force-pushed the duplicate-connection-type-page branch 3 times, most recently from 5974089 to 2ed6fd9 Compare August 7, 2024 19:17
@emilys314 emilys314 force-pushed the duplicate-connection-type-page branch from 2ed6fd9 to 6488dca Compare August 7, 2024 22:00
@jenny-s51 jenny-s51 self-requested a review August 9, 2024 15:18
Copy link
Contributor

@jenny-s51 jenny-s51 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Duplicate page looks good and works as expected @emilys314 , tested by creating a data connection and was able to duplicate it successfully.

Just a note about the empty state table under Fields, would we want to use a default empty state rather than an empty state table? According to the mocks it looks like we don't want to show the table headers if there are no fields.

Otherwise LGTM!

Copy link
Contributor

@jenny-s51 jenny-s51 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

/lgtm

@ashley-o0o
Copy link
Contributor

Tested locally, and ran the Cypress tests in the Cypress UI. Everything looking good on my end! One note, you'll need to squash commits before approval :)
/lgtm

@jeff-phillips-18
Copy link
Contributor

/cc @simrandhaliw

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the lgtm label Aug 12, 2024
@emilys314
Copy link
Contributor Author

Tested locally, and ran the Cypress tests in the Cypress UI. Everything looking good on my end! One note, you'll need to squash commits before approval :) /lgtm

I think this is no longer the case. based on what i was seeing in some slack convos, the PR should squash it for you now

@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot removed the needs-rebase PR needs to be rebased label Aug 13, 2024
@christianvogt
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm
/approve

Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Aug 13, 2024

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: christianvogt, jenny-s51

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@openshift-merge-bot openshift-merge-bot bot merged commit 12b1bb9 into opendatahub-io:main Aug 13, 2024
6 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants