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

API-41897-remove-updatepoaaccess-for-dependent-claimant #19428

Open
wants to merge 6 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

rockwellwindsor-va
Copy link
Contributor

@rockwellwindsor-va rockwellwindsor-va commented Nov 12, 2024

Summary

  • Updates poa updater to skip running poa vbms updater job if we are in the dependent workflow
  • Adds/updates related tests
graph TD;
    A{submission} -->B[PoaFormBuilderJob];
    B --> C(Is it a dependent filing?);
    C --> D{Yes};
    C --> E{No};
    D --> F[PoaAssignDependentClaimantJob];
    E --> H[POAUpdaterJob];
    H --> G[PoaVBMSUpdater];
Loading

Related issue(s)

API-41897

Testing done

  • New code is covered by unit tests

Testing notes

  • Submitting a request for a dependent claimant should skip the poa vbms updater sidekiq job since we do not want to call updatePoaAccess n that workflow

Screenshots

Note: Optional

What areas of the site does it impact?

modified:   modules/claims_api/app/sidekiq/claims_api/poa_updater.rb
modified:   modules/claims_api/spec/sidekiq/poa_updater_spec.rb

Acceptance criteria

  • I fixed|updated|added unit tests and integration tests for each feature (if applicable).
  • No error nor warning in the console.
  • Events are being sent to the appropriate logging solution
  • Documentation has been updated (link to documentation)
  • No sensitive information (i.e. PII/credentials/internal URLs/etc.) is captured in logging, hardcoded, or specs
  • Feature/bug has a monitor built into Datadog (if applicable)
  • If app impacted requires authentication, did you login to a local build and verify all authenticated routes work as expected
  • I added a screenshot of the developed feature

Requested Feedback

(OPTIONAL)What should the reviewers know in addition to the above. Is there anything specific you wish the reviewer to assist with. Do you have any concerns with this PR, why?

* Updates poa updater to skip running poa vbms updater job if we are in the dependent workflow
* Adds/updates related tests
	modified:   modules/claims_api/app/sidekiq/claims_api/poa_updater.rb
	modified:   modules/claims_api/spec/sidekiq/poa_updater_spec.rb
@rockwellwindsor-va rockwellwindsor-va marked this pull request as ready for review November 12, 2024 22:17
@rockwellwindsor-va rockwellwindsor-va requested a review from a team as a code owner November 12, 2024 22:17
@va-vfs-bot va-vfs-bot temporarily deployed to API-41897-remove-updatepoaaccess-for-dependent-claimant/main/main November 12, 2024 22:20 Inactive
@rockwellwindsor-va rockwellwindsor-va marked this pull request as draft November 12, 2024 22:35
@rockwellwindsor-va rockwellwindsor-va added the claimsApi modules/claims_api label Nov 12, 2024
@rockwellwindsor-va rockwellwindsor-va marked this pull request as ready for review November 12, 2024 22:35
@@ -30,7 +30,9 @@ def perform(power_of_attorney_id, rep = nil) # rubocop:disable Metrics/MethodLen

ClaimsApi::VANotifyJob.perform_async(poa_form.id, rep) if vanotify?(poa_form.auth_headers, rep)

ClaimsApi::PoaVBMSUpdater.perform_async(poa_form.id) if enable_vbms_access?(poa_form:)
if enable_vbms_access?(poa_form:) && update_poa_access?(poa_form.auth_headers)
Copy link
Contributor

@tycol7 tycol7 Nov 14, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Iʼm not sure the extra helper methods add any value. Could we instead just say:

Suggested change
if enable_vbms_access?(poa_form:) && update_poa_access?(poa_form.auth_headers)
if enable_vbms_access?(poa_form:) && poa_form.auth_headers['dependent'].blank?

?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@tycol7 Yep makes sense, b26e5c3

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.

3 participants