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

Epic/cv2-4441 Articles Trash #2131

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Sep 27, 2024
Merged

Epic/cv2-4441 Articles Trash #2131

merged 4 commits into from
Sep 27, 2024

Conversation

sarahkeh
Copy link
Contributor

@sarahkeh sarahkeh commented Sep 26, 2024

Description

Article trash feature:
Article Button - CV2-4502
Article List - CV2-5069

Type of change

  • Performance improvement and/or refactoring (non-breaking change that keeps existing functionality)
  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Security mitigation or enhancement
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
  • Automated test (add or update automated tests)

How has this been tested?

Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Provide instructions so we can verify the changes. Please describe whether or not you implemented automated tests.

Things to pay attention to during code review

Please describe parts of the change that require extra attention during code review, for example:

  • File FFFF, line LL: This refactoring does this and this. Is it consistent with how it’s implemented elsewhere?
  • Etc.

Checklist

  • I have performed a self-review of my own code
  • I've made sure my branch is runnable and given good testing steps in the PR description
  • I considered secure coding practices when writing this code. Any security concerns are noted above.
  • I have commented my code in hard-to-understand areas, if any
  • I have made needed changes to the README
  • My changes generate no new warnings
  • I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
  • If I implemented any new components, they are self-contained, their propTypes are declared and they use React Hooks and, if data-fetching is required, they use Relay Modern with fragment containers
  • If my components involve user interaction - specifically button, text fields, or other inputs - I have added a BEM-like class name to the element that is interacted with
  • To the best of my knowledge, any new styles are applied according to the design system
  • If I added a new external dependency, I included a rationale for doing so and an estimate of the change in bundle size (e.g., checked in https://bundlephobia.com/)
  • If I touched a file that included an eslint-disable-file header, I updated the code such that the disabler can be removed

* initial commit

* trash feature

* restore article copy and icon, force refresh after successful save

* oops linter error

* updated copy, added p tags to messages, fixed claim message, extracted repetitive sentences for easier translation
* initial commit

* feed and sidebar count

* removed type requirement from articles component

* list view, removed previous null type changes, added a callback for article_type filter

* updated localization file

* replaced icon

* setTags to setType
@sarahkeh sarahkeh marked this pull request as ready for review September 27, 2024 21:11
@caiosba caiosba self-requested a review September 27, 2024 21:20
Copy link
Contributor

@caiosba caiosba left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The PRs for the features under this epic were approved, so I'm just approving the epic as well.

@sarahkeh sarahkeh merged commit 2615f48 into develop Sep 27, 2024
4 checks passed
@sarahkeh sarahkeh deleted the epic/CV2-4441-articles-trash branch September 27, 2024 21:48
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants