Update code events page #6158
Conversation
|
Want to review this pull request? Take a look at this documentation for a step by step guide! From your project repository, check out a new branch and test the changes. Note that CONTRIBUTING.md cannot previewed locally; rather it should be previewed at this URL: |
|
Availability: Friday 1/26 5pm - 10pm, Saturday 1/27 3pm-7pm, Monday 1/29 5pm-8pm ETA: Monday EOD |
|
ETA: EoD 1/29/12 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hey @Anahisv23 thanks for taking up the issue, your solution works as required, the content you provided is correct, your branches are correct as well.....
A slight change can be made to simplify the conditional statement..... you can replace
if (item && item.project.name (item.project.name !== "Hack4LA" && item.project.name !== "test"))
with
if (item?.project?.name !== "Hack4LA" && item?.project?.name !== "test")
Your piece of code is correct too... the above one looks more simpler with optional chaining I've suggested the above line of code from @nelsonuprety1 solution for the same issue.......
I would like to hear from the other reviewers about the above suggestion!!
|
Yes @freaky4wrld, I also think implementing the optional chaining will make the code look more readable and clean. |
|
@freaky4wrld @nelsonuprety1 What about deleting the "test mctestyface" and "HackforLA" in the vrms api endpoint itself? If that's the source of it, delete it there? It's a mess but I thought there's a vs code readable extension for it? |
|
Hey @freaky4wrld @nelsonuprety1 @njackman-2344 thanks for the feedback and reviewing the PR. I can go ahead and change the conditional statement to incorporate the chaining suggestions. ETA: Monday Jan 29, 3 - 7pm |
Updated the if condition to include the chaining suggestion line 150.
|
Hey y'all, I just changed the if condition to include the chaining suggestions. Let me know if everything looks good. |
Hey @njackman-2344 we use the API to fetch information regarding the events, deleting those events might need some authorization which is given to |
|
Hey @Anahisv23 I can see the instance of
I would like to know others opinion on the above suggestions...... or @Anahisv23 @roslynwythe @njackman-2344 and @nelsonuprety1 have any other solution to resolve this issue. |
Hey @freaky4wrld. Good catch! I like this approach. I can update it so it will also handle that new "Test-Updated Name Prod" case. |
freaky4wrld
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hey there @Anahisv23 thanks for taking up the issue and bearing with me for making those changes I appreciate your commitment towards the issue....
Also thanks @njackman-2344 @roslynwythe and @nelsonuprety1 for sharing their insights on the issue
These are my observation :
- to/from branch looks good
- issue is linked correctly
- reason for making the changes and the places where changes are made are discussed
- Visual changes are apt as well
- Testing on local environment shows no sign of dangling events from the past or the events for testing purposes
PR approved.......
njackman-2344
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I agree with @freaky4wrld for PR approval.
The branch looks correct and issue is linked. Correction made.
Visuals look good and testing as well.
Great!!
roslynwythe
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Great job on this issue @Anahisv23 - as the other reviewers noted, your initial PR was perfectly fine, but we appreciate your willingness to incorporate their suggestions.
@nelsonuprety1 that was some pretty elegant javascript, thanks for that
@freaky4wrld great review as always, so glad you spotted the test event and proposed a fix.
No problem! Thanks for reviewing the issue :) |

Fixes #6082
What changes did you make?
Why did you make the changes (we will use this info to test)?
Screenshots of Proposed Changes Of The Website (if any, please do not screen shot code changes)
Visuals before changes are applied
Visuals after changes are applied