feat(j-s): Case Files Added Notification #16452
Conversation
Datadog ReportAll test runs ✅ 9 Total Test Services: 0 Failed, 9 Passed Test Services
🔻 Code Coverage Decreases vs Default Branch (2) |
…iles-added-notification
…iles-added-notification
WalkthroughThis pull request enhances the Changes
Possibly related PRs
Suggested reviewers
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
Documentation and Community
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 6
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (19)
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/test/notificationController/sendCaseFilesUpdatedNotifications.spec.ts (1)
57-67: Good test coverage, but consider adding more test cases.The current assertions effectively cover the main functionality of the
sendCaseNotificationmethod. However, to improve test coverage and robustness, consider adding the following test cases:
- Error handling: Test the behavior when
sendMessagesToQueuefails.- Edge cases: Test with different
NotificationTypevalues.- Input validation: Test with invalid inputs (e.g., null or undefined
caseId).Example of an additional test case for error handling:
it('should handle errors when sending message to queue fails', async () => { const errorMessage = 'Failed to send message'; mockMessageService.sendMessagesToQueue.mockRejectedValue(new Error(errorMessage)); const result = await givenWhenThen(caseId); expect(result.error).toBeInstanceOf(Error); expect(result.error.message).toBe(errorMessage); expect(result.result).toBeUndefined(); });apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/notification.service.ts (1)
78-78: LGTM! Consider grouping similar cases for better maintainability.The addition of
NotificationType.CASE_FILES_UPDATEDis correctly implemented and follows the existing pattern. It's a straightforward extension of the notification functionality.For improved code maintainability, consider grouping similar cases together. You could combine this new case with other similar ones like this:
case NotificationType.HEADS_UP: case NotificationType.ADVOCATE_ASSIGNED: case NotificationType.APPEAL_JUDGES_ASSIGNED: case NotificationType.APPEAL_CASE_FILES_UPDATED: case NotificationType.CASE_FILES_UPDATED: messages = [this.getNotificationMessage(type, user, theCase)] breakThis grouping makes it easier to see at a glance which notification types are handled in the same way.
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/guards/rolesRules.ts (1)
22-25: LGTM: Defender notification rule updated correctly with improved formatting.The addition of
NotificationType.CASE_FILES_UPDATEDto thedefenderNotificationRuleis appropriate and aligns with the PR objective. This change enables defenders to send notifications when case files are updated, which is a logical extension of their role. The multi-line format improves readability.Consider adding a trailing comma after the last item in the array for consistency with TypeScript best practices:
dtoFieldValues: [ NotificationType.APPEAL_CASE_FILES_UPDATED, - NotificationType.CASE_FILES_UPDATED, + NotificationType.CASE_FILES_UPDATED, ],apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/test/internalNotificationController/sendCaseFilesUpdatedNotifications.spec.ts (4)
25-72: LGTM: Well-structured test suite setup with a minor suggestion.The test suite setup is comprehensive and follows best practices for Jest testing. The use of UUIDs for test data ensures uniqueness, and the
givenWhenThenfunction provides a clean way to structure the tests.Consider extracting the mock case data (lines 52-61) into a separate function or constant to improve readability and reusability. For example:
const createMockCase = (caseId: string, courtCaseNumber: string) => ({ id: caseId, type: CaseType.INDICTMENT, courtCaseNumber, prosecutor: { name: prosecutorName, email: prosecutorEmail }, judge: { name: judgeName, email: judgeEmail }, defendants: [{ defenderName, defenderEmail }], civilClaimants: [ { hasSpokesperson: true, spokespersonName, spokespersonEmail }, ], } as Case);This would make the
givenWhenThenfunction more concise and easier to maintain.🧰 Tools
🪛 Biome
[error] 67-67: The assignment should not be in an expression.
The use of assignments in expressions is confusing.
Expressions are often considered as side-effect free.(lint/suspicious/noAssignInExpressions)
[error] 68-68: The assignment should not be in an expression.
The use of assignments in expressions is confusing.
Expressions are often considered as side-effect free.(lint/suspicious/noAssignInExpressions)
74-104: LGTM: Comprehensive test for prosecutor notifications with a suggestion for improvement.The test for prosecutor notifications is well-structured and covers all necessary aspects, including verifying email recipients, content, and delivery status.
To enhance test readability and maintainability, consider extracting the expected email content into constants. For example:
const JUDGE_EMAIL_CONTENT = `Ný gögn hafa borist vegna máls ${courtCaseNumber}. Hægt er að nálgast gögn málsins á <a href="http://localhost:4200/domur/akaera/yfirlit/${caseId}">yfirlitssíðu málsins í Réttarvörslugátt</a>.`; const DEFENDER_EMAIL_CONTENT = `Ný gögn hafa borist vegna máls ${courtCaseNumber}. Hægt er að nálgast gögn málsins á <a href="http://localhost:4200/verjandi/akaera/${caseId}">yfirlitssíðu málsins í Réttarvörslugátt</a>.`;This would make the expectations easier to read and update if needed.
106-135: LGTM: Well-structured test for defender notifications with a suggestion for improvement.The test for defender notifications is consistent with the prosecutor test, which is excellent for maintaining a clear testing pattern. It covers all necessary aspects, including verifying email recipients, content, and delivery status.
Similar to the suggestion for the prosecutor test, consider extracting the expected email content into constants to improve readability and maintainability. Additionally, you could create a helper function to reduce duplication in email content expectations. For example:
const createExpectedEmailContent = (role: string, caseId: string, courtCaseNumber: string) => { const baseUrl = role === 'judge' ? 'domur/akaera/yfirlit' : role === 'prosecutor' ? 'akaera/yfirlit' : 'verjandi/akaera'; return `Ný gögn hafa borist vegna máls ${courtCaseNumber}. Hægt er að nálgast gögn málsins á <a href="http://localhost:4200/${baseUrl}/${caseId}">yfirlitssíðu málsins í Réttarvörslugátt</a>.`; };This would make the expectations more concise and easier to maintain across both tests.
1-136: LGTM: Comprehensive test coverage with suggestions for enhancement.The overall test structure is well-organized and provides good coverage for the main scenarios of prosecutor and defender notifications. The use of the
GivenWhenThenpattern promotes clear and consistent test structure.Consider the following enhancements to further improve the test suite:
Add tests for edge cases, such as:
- Cases with multiple defendants or civil claimants
- Cases without a spokesperson
- Error scenarios (e.g., email service failure)
Implement a parameterized test using Jest's
test.eachto reduce duplication between prosecutor and defender tests. For example:test.each([ ['prosecutor', UserRole.PROSECUTOR, InstitutionType.PROSECUTORS_OFFICE], ['defender', UserRole.DEFENDER, undefined], ])('notification sent by %s', async (role, userRole, institutionType) => { // Test implementation });
- Consider adding a test for the
InternalNotificationController.sendCaseNotificationmethod to ensure it handles different notification types correctly.These additions would enhance the robustness and maintainability of the test suite.
🧰 Tools
🪛 Biome
[error] 67-67: The assignment should not be in an expression.
The use of assignments in expressions is confusing.
Expressions are often considered as side-effect free.(lint/suspicious/noAssignInExpressions)
[error] 68-68: The assignment should not be in an expression.
The use of assignments in expressions is confusing.
Expressions are often considered as side-effect free.(lint/suspicious/noAssignInExpressions)
apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Shared/AppealToCourtOfAppeals/AppealToCourtOfAppeals.tsx (2)
73-76: Improved variable naming and return type handling.The change from
allSucceededtouploadResultenhances code clarity by using a more descriptive variable name. It also suggests thathandleUploadnow returns a more detailed status, which is a good practice for better error handling and type safety.Consider defining a TypeScript enum or union type for the possible
uploadResultvalues to further improve type safety and code readability. For example:type UploadResult = 'ALL_SUCCEEDED' | 'PARTIAL_SUCCESS' | 'ALL_FAILED'; const uploadResult: UploadResult = await handleUpload( uploadFiles.filter((file) => file.percent === 0), updateUploadFile, );This would make the possible return values from
handleUploadexplicit and catch any typos at compile-time.
78-80: Explicit condition check improves readability, but introduces a magic string.The change to
uploadResult !== 'ALL_SUCCEEDED'is consistent with the new return type ofhandleUploadand makes the condition more explicit. However, it introduces a magic string, which could lead to maintainability issues.To improve maintainability and reduce the risk of typos, consider defining a constant for the 'ALL_SUCCEEDED' string. This could be part of an enum or object that defines all possible upload result values. For example:
const UPLOAD_RESULTS = { ALL_SUCCEEDED: 'ALL_SUCCEEDED', PARTIAL_SUCCESS: 'PARTIAL_SUCCESS', ALL_FAILED: 'ALL_FAILED', } as const; // Then in your condition: if (uploadResult !== UPLOAD_RESULTS.ALL_SUCCEEDED) { return; }This approach would centralize the definition of these strings, making it easier to maintain and refactor in the future.
apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Shared/AppealToCourtOfAppeals/AppealCaseFiles.tsx (1)
86-93: Improved upload result handling. Consider adding type safety.The changes to the
handleNextButtonClickfunction enhance clarity and explicitness in handling the upload result. The use of'ALL_SUCCEEDED'as a string literal is more descriptive than the previous boolean check.To further improve type safety, consider defining a union type for
uploadResult:type UploadResult = 'ALL_SUCCEEDED' | 'PARTIAL_SUCCESS' | 'ALL_FAILED'; const uploadResult: UploadResult = await handleUpload( uploadFiles.filter((file) => file.percent === 0), updateUploadFile, );This will ensure that
uploadResultcan only have predefined values, reducing the risk of typos or unexpected values.apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/test/internalNotificationController/sendAppealToCourtOfAppealsNotifications.spec.ts (1)
93-99: LGTM: Test case updated correctly with enhanced user information.The test case for "case appealed by prosecutor" has been properly updated to use the new
Userobject structure, including bothroleandinstitutionproperties. This change allows for more detailed testing scenarios.Consider adding additional test cases to cover different
InstitutionTypevalues for the prosecutor, as this could potentially uncover edge cases in the notification system's behavior.apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Shared/Statement/Statement.tsx (1)
77-84: Improved upload result handling, consider adding a constant for clarity.The changes to the
handleNextButtonClickfunction improve the handling of upload results by using a more descriptive string comparison instead of a boolean check. This allows for more granular error handling and better reflects the possible outcomes of the upload process.To further enhance code readability and maintainability, consider defining a constant for the 'ALL_SUCCEEDED' string:
const UPLOAD_SUCCESS = 'ALL_SUCCEEDED'; // Then use it in the condition if (uploadResult !== UPLOAD_SUCCESS) { return; }This change would make the code more resistant to typos and easier to update if the success string changes in the future.
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/test/internalNotificationController/sendAppealStatementNotifications.spec.ts (5)
23-26: LGTM: Improved type definition with a minor suggestionThe change from
role: UserRoletouser: Userenhances the flexibility and context of the tests. The rename ofappealsCourtNumbertoappealCaseNumberimproves clarity.For consistency, consider updating the
appealsCourtNumberparameter name in the function call on line 108 toappealCaseNumber.
102-109: LGTM: Updated test case with improved user contextThe changes correctly implement the new
Usertype in thegivenWhenThenfunction call. The addition of theinstitutionproperty enhances the context of the test case.For improved type safety, consider using a proper
Usertype instead of casting withas User:{ role: UserRole.PROSECUTOR, institution: { type: InstitutionType.PROSECUTORS_OFFICE }, } as const satisfies Partial<User>This approach ensures that the object conforms to the
Usertype without suppressing type checks.
133-138: LGTM: Consistent update of test caseThe changes here are consistent with the updates in the previous test case, correctly implementing the new
Usertype.As suggested in the previous comment, consider applying the same type safety improvement here using
as const satisfies Partial<User>.
189-195: LGTM: Consistent update of test caseThe changes here are consistent with the updates in the previous test cases, correctly implementing the new
Usertype for the prosecutor role.As suggested in previous comments, consider applying the same type safety improvement here using
as const satisfies Partial<User>.
214-217: LGTM: Updated test case with consistent user objectThe changes correctly implement the new
Usertype in thegivenWhenThenfunction call for the prosecutor role.For improved type safety and consistency with previous suggestions, consider updating the code as follows:
then = await givenWhenThen({ role: UserRole.PROSECUTOR, institution: { type: InstitutionType.PROSECUTORS_OFFICE }, } as const satisfies Partial<User>)This approach ensures that the object conforms to the
Usertype without suppressing type checks.apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Completed/Completed.tsx (1)
63-67: Improved upload result handling. Consider adding type safety.The changes to the
handleNextButtonClickfunction improve the specificity of upload result handling. The new string comparison allows for more detailed status reporting and potentially better error handling.To further enhance type safety, consider defining a union type for the possible upload results:
type UploadResult = 'ALL_SUCCEEDED' | 'PARTIAL_SUCCESS' | 'FAILED'; const uploadResult: UploadResult = await handleUpload( uploadFiles.filter((file) => file.percent === 0), updateUploadFile, );This change would make the possible outcomes of
handleUploadexplicit and catch any typos or inconsistencies at compile-time.apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/messages/notifications.ts (1)
862-874: LGTM! Consider a minor improvement for consistency.The new
caseFilesAddedmessage definition is well-structured and consistent with the existing code. It properly uses thedefineMessagefunction and includes appropriate placeholders for dynamic content.For consistency with other similar messages in this file, consider adding a version suffix to the
idvalues. For example:- id: 'judicial.system.backend:notifications.case_files_added.subject', + id: 'judicial.system.backend:notifications.case_files_added.subject_v1',- id: 'judicial.system.backend:notifications.case_files_added.body', + id: 'judicial.system.backend:notifications.case_files_added.body_v1',This will make it easier to manage future updates to these messages.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (16)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/messages/notifications.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/guards/rolesRules.ts (2 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/internalNotification.service.ts (10 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/notification.service.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/test/internalNotificationController/sendAppealStatementNotifications.spec.ts (10 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/test/internalNotificationController/sendAppealToCourtOfAppealsNotifications.spec.ts (7 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/test/internalNotificationController/sendCaseFilesUpdatedNotifications.spec.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/test/notificationController/sendCaseFilesUpdatedNotifications.spec.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Completed/Completed.tsx (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Shared/AddFiles/AddFiles.tsx (3 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Shared/AppealToCourtOfAppeals/AppealCaseFiles.tsx (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Shared/AppealToCourtOfAppeals/AppealToCourtOfAppeals.tsx (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Shared/Statement/Statement.tsx (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/web/src/utils/hooks/index.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/web/src/utils/hooks/useS3Upload/useS3Upload.ts (1 hunks)
- libs/judicial-system/types/src/lib/notification.ts (1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (16)
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/messages/notifications.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/guards/rolesRules.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/internalNotification.service.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/notification.service.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/test/internalNotificationController/sendAppealStatementNotifications.spec.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/test/internalNotificationController/sendAppealToCourtOfAppealsNotifications.spec.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/test/internalNotificationController/sendCaseFilesUpdatedNotifications.spec.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/test/notificationController/sendCaseFilesUpdatedNotifications.spec.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Completed/Completed.tsx (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Shared/AddFiles/AddFiles.tsx (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Shared/AppealToCourtOfAppeals/AppealCaseFiles.tsx (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Shared/AppealToCourtOfAppeals/AppealToCourtOfAppeals.tsx (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Shared/Statement/Statement.tsx (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/web/src/utils/hooks/index.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/web/src/utils/hooks/useS3Upload/useS3Upload.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
libs/judicial-system/types/src/lib/notification.ts (1)
Pattern
libs/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- Reusability of components and hooks across different NextJS apps.
- TypeScript usage for defining props and exporting types.
- Effective tree-shaking and bundling practices."
🪛 Biome
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/test/internalNotificationController/sendCaseFilesUpdatedNotifications.spec.ts
[error] 67-67: The assignment should not be in an expression.
The use of assignments in expressions is confusing.
Expressions are often considered as side-effect free.(lint/suspicious/noAssignInExpressions)
[error] 68-68: The assignment should not be in an expression.
The use of assignments in expressions is confusing.
Expressions are often considered as side-effect free.(lint/suspicious/noAssignInExpressions)
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/test/notificationController/sendCaseFilesUpdatedNotifications.spec.ts
[error] 42-42: The assignment should not be in an expression.
The use of assignments in expressions is confusing.
Expressions are often considered as side-effect free.(lint/suspicious/noAssignInExpressions)
[error] 43-43: The assignment should not be in an expression.
The use of assignments in expressions is confusing.
Expressions are often considered as side-effect free.(lint/suspicious/noAssignInExpressions)
🔇 Additional comments (37)
libs/judicial-system/types/src/lib/notification.ts (1)
21-21: LGTM: New enum value aligns with PR objectives and follows conventions.The addition of
CASE_FILES_UPDATEDto theNotificationTypeenum is consistent with the PR's objective of implementing a notification system for case file updates. It follows the existing naming convention and structure of the enum.A few points to consider:
- This change enhances type safety for notifications related to case file updates, which is a good TypeScript practice.
- As this is in a shared library (
libs/), ensure that all consuming components are updated to handle this new notification type appropriately.- Consider adding a brief comment explaining the purpose of this notification type for better documentation.
To ensure this change doesn't introduce any issues, please run the following script:
✅ Verification successful
Verified: No hardcoded uses of
CASE_FILES_UPDATEDfound outsidenotification.ts. All usages correctly reference theNotificationType.CASE_FILES_UPDATEDenum.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for any hardcoded uses of the string 'CASE_FILES_UPDATED' that might need updating # Test: Search for hardcoded uses of the string. Expect: No results outside of this enum definition. rg --type typescript "'CASE_FILES_UPDATED'" -g '!**/notification.ts'Length of output: 111
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for any hardcoded uses of the string 'CASE_FILES_UPDATED' that might need updating # Test: Search for hardcoded uses of the string. Expect: No results outside of this enum definition. rg --type ts "'CASE_FILES_UPDATED'" -g '!**/notification.ts'Length of output: 68
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for any hardcoded uses of the string 'CASE_FILES_UPDATED' that might need updating # Test: Search for hardcoded uses of the string. Expect: No results outside of this enum definition. rg --type ts "'CASE_FILES_UPDATED'" -g '!**/notification.ts'Length of output: 68
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for any hardcoded uses of the string 'CASE_FILES_UPDATED' that might need updating # Test: Search for hardcoded uses of the string. Expect: No results outside of this enum definition. rg --type ts "CASE_FILES_UPDATED" -g '!**/notification.ts'Length of output: 2982
apps/judicial-system/web/src/utils/hooks/index.ts (3)
1-5: Improved TypeScript export syntaxThe change to
export { type UpdateCase }utilizes a more modern and concise TypeScript syntax for type exports. This improvement enhances code readability while maintaining type safety.
9-12: Consistent improvement in type export syntaxThe modification of
export { type TUploadFile }aligns with the previous change, maintaining a consistent and modern approach to type exports throughout the file. This update enhances code readability without altering functionality.
17-22: Improved organization and consistent type export syntaxThe changes in this segment demonstrate:
- Consistent use of the modern TypeScript type export syntax.
- Improved code organization by grouping related exports (UploadState and useCourtUpload) together.
These modifications enhance code readability and maintainability while aligning with NextJS best practices for efficient state management. The clear and organized exports facilitate easier use in components throughout the application.
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/test/notificationController/sendCaseFilesUpdatedNotifications.spec.ts (3)
1-16: LGTM: Imports and type definitions are well-structured.The imports are appropriate for the test file, and the
Theninterface andGivenWhenThentype are well-defined, improving code readability and type safety.
49-55: LGTM: Test case setup is well-structured.The test case setup follows Jest best practices. The use of
uuid()ensures unique case IDs for each test run, which is good for test isolation.
1-69: Overall, excellent test file structure and adherence to coding guidelines.This test file demonstrates good practices in several areas:
- It follows Jest and TypeScript best practices, enhancing type safety and test reliability.
- The file structure aligns with NextJS best practices for organizing test files.
- It focuses on testing a specific functionality (sending case files updated notifications), which promotes maintainability.
- The use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety is optimal.
To further improve the file:
- Consider adding more comprehensive test cases as suggested earlier.
- Ensure that any shared setup logic is moved to beforeAll or beforeEach blocks to reduce duplication.
🧰 Tools
🪛 Biome
[error] 42-42: The assignment should not be in an expression.
The use of assignments in expressions is confusing.
Expressions are often considered as side-effect free.(lint/suspicious/noAssignInExpressions)
[error] 43-43: The assignment should not be in an expression.
The use of assignments in expressions is confusing.
Expressions are often considered as side-effect free.(lint/suspicious/noAssignInExpressions)
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/guards/rolesRules.ts (2)
Line range hint
1-91: Overall assessment: Changes are well-implemented and align with PR objectives.The modifications to both
prosecutorNotificationRuleanddefenderNotificationRulesuccessfully implement the new notification type for case file updates. The changes are consistent with the existing code structure and follow TypeScript best practices. The file adheres to NextJS conventions and makes effective use of TypeScript for type safety.
13-13: LGTM: Prosecutor notification rule updated correctly.The addition of
NotificationType.CASE_FILES_UPDATEDto theprosecutorNotificationRuleis appropriate and aligns with the PR objective. This change enables prosecutors to send notifications when case files are updated, which is a logical extension of their role.Let's verify if this notification type is consistently applied to other relevant roles:
✅ Verification successful
Let's verify if
CASE_FILES_UPDATEDis consistently applied to other relevant roles:
Verified:
CASE_FILES_UPDATEDis consistently applied to relevant roles.All relevant roles, including prosecutors and defenders, have been updated to include
NotificationType.CASE_FILES_UPDATED, ensuring consistent notification functionality across the system.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check if CASE_FILES_UPDATED is consistently applied across relevant roles # Test: Search for CASE_FILES_UPDATED in the file rg --type typescript "CASE_FILES_UPDATED" apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/guards/rolesRules.tsLength of output: 155
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check if CASE_FILES_UPDATED is consistently applied across relevant roles # Test: Search for CASE_FILES_UPDATED in the specified file with corrected file type rg --type ts "CASE_FILES_UPDATED" apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/guards/rolesRules.tsLength of output: 290
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/test/internalNotificationController/sendCaseFilesUpdatedNotifications.spec.ts (2)
1-23: LGTM: Imports and type definitions are well-structured.The imports and type definitions are appropriate for the test file. The custom
GivenWhenThentype is a good practice for structuring the tests, promoting readability and maintainability.
67-68: Static analysis hints addressed: Assignments in promise chain.The static analysis tool flagged assignments in the promise chain on lines 67 and 68. However, this pattern is common and acceptable in testing scenarios, especially when using the
GivenWhenThenpattern.If you want to address these warnings, you could refactor the promise chain to use async/await syntax:
try { then.result = await internalNotificationController.sendCaseNotification( // ... arguments ... ); } catch (error) { then.error = error; }This approach would resolve the static analysis warnings while maintaining the same functionality.
🧰 Tools
🪛 Biome
[error] 67-67: The assignment should not be in an expression.
The use of assignments in expressions is confusing.
Expressions are often considered as side-effect free.(lint/suspicious/noAssignInExpressions)
[error] 68-68: The assignment should not be in an expression.
The use of assignments in expressions is confusing.
Expressions are often considered as side-effect free.(lint/suspicious/noAssignInExpressions)
apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Shared/AppealToCourtOfAppeals/AppealToCourtOfAppeals.tsx (1)
Line range hint
1-238: Overall, the changes improve error handling and code clarity.The modifications to the
handleNextButtonClickfunction enhance the handling of upload results and improve code readability. The changes align well with TypeScript best practices and the overall structure of the component.To ensure that these changes are consistent throughout the codebase, please run the following verification script:
This will help identify any other locations where similar changes might be beneficial for consistency.
✅ Verification successful
Consistent upload handling verified successfully.
The usage of
handleUploadand theALL_SUCCEEDEDstatus is consistent across the codebase.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for consistent usage of upload result handling across the codebase # Search for other occurrences of handleUpload and its result handling rg --type typescript -A 5 $'handleUpload' # Search for other occurrences of 'ALL_SUCCEEDED' string rg --type typescript $'ALL_SUCCEEDED'Length of output: 147
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for consistent usage of upload result handling across the codebase # Search for other occurrences of handleUpload and its result handling in TypeScript files rg --type ts -A 5 'handleUpload' rg --type tsx -A 5 'handleUpload' # Search for other occurrences of 'ALL_SUCCEEDED' string in TypeScript files rg --type ts 'ALL_SUCCEEDED' rg --type tsx 'ALL_SUCCEEDED'Length of output: 28036
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for consistent usage of handleUpload and 'ALL_SUCCEEDED' across TypeScript files # Search for occurrences of handleUpload in .ts files rg 'handleUpload' --glob '*.ts' -A 5 # Search for occurrences of handleUpload in .tsx files rg 'handleUpload' --glob '*.tsx' -A 5 # Search for occurrences of 'ALL_SUCCEEDED' in .ts files rg 'ALL_SUCCEEDED' --glob '*.ts' # Search for occurrences of 'ALL_SUCCEEDED' in .tsx files rg 'ALL_SUCCEEDED' --glob '*.tsx'Length of output: 27993
apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Shared/AppealToCourtOfAppeals/AppealCaseFiles.tsx (2)
Line range hint
91-98: Correct update to useCallback dependenciesThe addition of
updateUploadFileto the dependency array ofuseCallbackis correct and necessary. This change ensures that the callback is properly updated ifupdateUploadFilechanges, aligning with React best practices for managing hook dependencies.
Line range hint
1-238: Overall assessment: Good improvements with minor enhancement suggestionsThe changes in this file effectively improve the handling of upload results for appeal case files. The modifications align well with TypeScript and React best practices, enhancing code clarity and maintainability. The implementation contributes positively to the case files added notification feature.
While no major issues were found, consider implementing the suggested type safety improvement for
uploadResultto further enhance the robustness of the code.apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/test/internalNotificationController/sendAppealToCourtOfAppealsNotifications.spec.ts (4)
7-7: LGTM: Import statement updated correctly.The addition of
InstitutionTypeto the import statement is consistent with the changes in theGivenWhenThentype and aligns with TypeScript best practices.
Line range hint
56-79: LGTM: givenWhenThen function updated correctly.The
givenWhenThenfunction has been properly updated to accept aUserobject instead of aUserRole. This change is consistent with the updated type definition and allows for more accurate simulation of different user scenarios in the tests.
144-147: LGTM: Remaining test cases updated, but clarification needed for defender case.The test cases have been correctly updated to use the new
Userobject structure, providing more detailed user information for comprehensive testing.Please clarify if the omission of an
institutionproperty for the defender test case (line 177) is intentional. If not, consider adding the appropriate institution type for consistency. You can use the following command to check for other defender test cases and their structure:#!/bin/bash # Search for defender test cases rg --type typescript 'givenWhenThen.*UserRole.DEFENDER' apps/judicial-system/backend/src/**/*.spec.tsAlso applies to: 177-177
23-23: LGTM: GivenWhenThen type updated for improved flexibility.The change from
UserRoletoUserin theGivenWhenThentype definition provides more comprehensive user information in the tests, aligning with TypeScript best practices for improved type safety.Please ensure that all existing test cases have been updated to use the new
Userobject structure. Run the following command to check for any remainingUserRoleusages in test files:apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Shared/Statement/Statement.tsx (1)
Line range hint
1-285: Well-structured component adhering to NextJS and React best practicesThe overall structure and implementation of this component demonstrate adherence to NextJS and React best practices:
- Effective use of React hooks for state management and side effects.
- Proper utilization of TypeScript for enhanced type safety throughout the component.
- Custom hooks (useCase, useS3Upload, useUploadFiles) encapsulate complex logic, promoting code reusability and maintainability.
- The component structure and import statements align with NextJS conventions.
- Server-side props (workingCase) are used, which is beneficial for SEO and initial load performance in NextJS applications.
The code demonstrates a good balance between functionality and maintainability. Keep up the good work!
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/test/internalNotificationController/sendAppealStatementNotifications.spec.ts (4)
Line range hint
6-10: LGTM: Improved type imports for better type safetyThe addition of
InstitutionTypeandUserimports enhances the type safety of the test suite. This change aligns well with TypeScript best practices by using more specific types.
162-166: LGTM: Updated test case for defender roleThe changes correctly implement the new
Usertype in thegivenWhenThenfunction call for the defender role.Could you clarify if the absence of the
institutionproperty for the defender role is intentional? If it's not required for defenders, consider adding a comment explaining this to improve code readability.
236-236: LGTM: Consistent update for defender test caseThe changes correctly implement the new
Usertype in thegivenWhenThenfunction call for the defender role.For improved type safety and consistency with previous suggestions, consider updating the code as follows:
then = await givenWhenThen({ role: UserRole.DEFENDER } as const satisfies Partial<User>, uuid())This approach ensures that the object conforms to the
Usertype without suppressing type checks.As mentioned in a previous comment, please clarify if the absence of the
institutionproperty for the defender role is intentional.
Line range hint
1-252: Overall: Improved test suite with enhanced type safetyThe changes in this file consistently update the test cases to use the new
Usertype instead of justUserRole. This improvement enhances the flexibility and context of the tests, aligning well with TypeScript best practices.Key points:
- The addition of
InstitutionTypeandUserimports improves type safety.- The
GivenWhenThentype definition has been updated to use theUsertype, providing more context for the tests.- All test cases have been consistently updated to use the new
Userobject structure.Suggestions for further improvement:
- Consider using
as const satisfies Partial<User>instead ofas Userfor better type safety.- Clarify the intentional omission of the
institutionproperty for defender roles.- Update the
appealsCourtNumberparameter name toappealCaseNumberfor consistency.These changes significantly improve the test suite's type safety and readability, adhering well to NextJS and TypeScript best practices.
apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Shared/AddFiles/AddFiles.tsx (4)
22-24: Correctly importingNotificationType.The import of
NotificationTypefrom the GraphQL schema is appropriate for handling case file notifications.
54-54: ExtractingsendNotificationfromuseCase.Destructuring
sendNotificationfrom theuseCasehook is correctly implemented and ensures access to the notification function.
90-98: Notification logic inhandleNextButtonClickis appropriate.The function correctly checks the result of
handleUploadand sends a notification when one or more files are successfully uploaded.
104-109: Dependencies inuseCallbackare properly specified.All necessary dependencies are included in the dependency array of the
useCallbackhook forhandleNextButtonClick, ensuring proper memoization.apps/judicial-system/web/src/utils/hooks/useS3Upload/useS3Upload.ts (1)
315-325: Ensure proper error handling for individual uploadsIn the current implementation, if an individual upload fails, it's caught within the promise for that file. However, any unexpected errors in the
Promise.allmight not be handled. Ensure that any exceptions are properly caught to prevent unhandled promise rejections.apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/internalNotification.service.ts (9)
77-81: Imports are correctly added.The added imports for
CivilClaimant,Defendant, andDefendantServiceare necessary for the new functionality implemented in the notification service.
1551-1553: Ensure logical consistency in conditional checks.The added condition checks if the defender is included in session arrangements before proceeding. Verify that
isDefenderIncludedInSessionArrangementsaccurately reflects scenarios where the defender should receive notifications in investigation cases.
1641-1645: Validate the inclusion of spokespersons before sending notifications.The added
hasSpokespersoncondition ensures notifications are sent only when a civil claimant has a spokesperson. This prevents unnecessary notifications to undefined recipients.
1869-1878: Verify recipient correctness when sending notifications.In the block where
isDefenceUser(user)is true, the notification is sent to the prosecutor. Confirm that this is the intended behavior. Usually, when a defence user adds case files, notifications might be expected to go to the court or other relevant parties, not the prosecutor.
Line range hint
1988-1995: Confirm notification logic for defence users.When a defence user sends an appeal to the court of appeals, notifications are being sent to the prosecutor. Ensure that this aligns with the desired notification flow and that the prosecutor should indeed receive both an email and an SMS in this scenario.
Line range hint
2000-2007: Ensure correct notification recipients for prosecution users.In this conditional block, when the user is a prosecution user, notifications are sent to the defender. Verify that this is appropriate and that the defender should receive notifications when a prosecution user initiates this action.
Line range hint
2218-2225: Validate notification flow for defence users submitting appeal statements.Check that when a defence user submits an appeal statement, sending notifications to the prosecutor is the expected behavior. Ensure that the prosecutor should be notified in this context.
Line range hint
2240-2250: Review notification logic for prosecution users regarding defenders.When a prosecution user is submitting, the code sends notifications to the defender. Confirm that this complies with the notification policy and that defenders should be notified in this scenario, especially considering access permissions.
Line range hint
2323-2333: Assess if prosecutors should be notified by defence users in case file updates.When defence users update appeal case files, notifications are sent to the prosecutor. Verify that this is intentional and conforms to the expected communication protocol.
...p/modules/notification/test/notificationController/sendCaseFilesUpdatedNotifications.spec.ts
Show resolved
Hide resolved
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/internalNotification.service.ts
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/internalNotification.service.ts
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/internalNotification.service.ts (1)
Line range hint
2323-2340: Refined notification logic for appeal case file updatesThe changes in the
sendAppealCaseFilesUpdatedNotificationsmethod improve the notification logic by only sending notifications to the prosecutor when case files are updated by a defence user. This prevents unnecessary notifications and aligns with the expected behavior.For consistency with the other similar changes, consider adding a check for the prosecutor's email before sending the notification:
if (isDefenceUser(user)) { + if (theCase.prosecutor?.email) { const prosecutorHtml = this.formatMessage( notifications.caseAppealCaseFilesUpdated.body, { courtCaseNumber: theCase.courtCaseNumber, appealCaseNumber: theCase.appealCaseNumber ?? 'NONE', linkStart: `<a href="${this.config.clientUrl}${SIGNED_VERDICT_OVERVIEW_ROUTE}/${theCase.id}">`, linkEnd: '</a>', }, ) promises.push( this.sendEmail( subject, prosecutorHtml, theCase.prosecutor?.name, theCase.prosecutor?.email, ), ) + } }This change ensures that the notification is only sent if the prosecutor's email is available, maintaining consistency with other similar checks in the codebase.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/internalNotification.service.ts (10 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (1)
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/internalNotification.service.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
🔇 Additional comments (2)
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/internalNotification.service.ts (2)
Line range hint
1988-2000: Improved notification logic for appeals to courtThe changes in the
sendAppealToCourtOfAppealsNotificationsmethod improve the notification logic by only sending notifications to the prosecutor when the appeal is initiated by a defence user. This prevents unnecessary notifications and aligns with the expected behavior.
Line range hint
2218-2240: Enhanced notification logic for appeal statementsThe changes in the
sendAppealStatementNotificationsmethod improve the notification logic by only sending notifications to the prosecutor when the appeal statement is submitted by a defence user. This prevents unnecessary notifications and aligns with the expected behavior.
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/internalNotification.service.ts
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/internalNotification.service.ts (1)
Line range hint
2323-2340: Improved notification logic for appeal case files updatesThe changes to the
sendAppealCaseFilesUpdatedNotificationsmethod enhance the notification process by considering the user's role when determining recipients. This ensures that prosecutors are notified when a defence user updates the appeal case files.The implementation is consistent with the improvements made in other methods and follows the established patterns in the file. Good job on maintaining consistency across different notification scenarios.
For completeness and symmetry with other similar methods, consider adding a condition for when the user is a prosecution user to notify the defence. This would make the method more robust and consistent with other notification methods. Here's a suggested addition:
} + if (isProsecutionUser(user) && theCase.defenderEmail) { + const defenderHtml = this.formatMessage( + notifications.caseAppealCaseFilesUpdated.body, + { + courtCaseNumber: theCase.courtCaseNumber, + appealCaseNumber: theCase.appealCaseNumber ?? 'NONE', + linkStart: `<a href="${formatDefenderRoute(this.config.clientUrl, theCase.type, theCase.id)}">`, + linkEnd: '</a>', + }, + ) + + promises.push( + this.sendEmail( + subject, + defenderHtml, + theCase.defenderName, + theCase.defenderEmail, + undefined, + !theCase.defenderNationalId, + ), + ) + } if (promises.length === 0) {This addition would ensure that defenders are notified when prosecutors update the appeal case files, maintaining consistency with other notification methods.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/messages/notifications.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/internalNotification.service.ts (10 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/messages/notifications.ts
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (1)
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/internalNotification.service.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
🔇 Additional comments (3)
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/internalNotification.service.ts (3)
Line range hint
1988-2000: Improved notification logic for appeal to court of appealsThe changes to the
sendAppealToCourtOfAppealsNotificationsmethod enhance the notification logic by considering the user's role (defence or prosecution) when determining recipients. This improvement ensures that the appropriate parties are notified based on who initiated the appeal.The use of
isDefenceUserandisProsecutionUserhelper functions makes the code more readable and maintainable. Good job on following the existing patterns in the file and improving the notification logic.
Line range hint
2218-2240: Enhanced notification logic for appeal statementsThe modifications to the
sendAppealStatementNotificationsmethod improve the notification process by taking into account the user's role (defence or prosecution) when determining the recipients. This change ensures that the appropriate parties are notified when an appeal statement is submitted.The implementation is consistent with the improvements made in the
sendAppealToCourtOfAppealsNotificationsmethod, maintaining a uniform approach throughout the file. The use ofisDefenceUserandisProsecutionUserhelper functions continues to enhance code readability and maintainability.
2700-2701: Successfully integrated CASE_FILES_UPDATED notification typeThe addition of the CASE_FILES_UPDATED case in the
sendCaseNotificationmethod's switch statement correctly integrates the new notification type into the existing system.This change ensures that the new CASE_FILES_UPDATED notifications can be triggered through the same interface as other notification types, maintaining consistency in the notification system. Good job on following the established pattern for adding new notification types.
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/internalNotification.service.ts
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (5)
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/internalNotification.service.ts (5)
Line range hint
1988-1998: Incorrect Recipient in Appeal NotificationsIn the
sendAppealToCourtOfAppealsNotificationsmethod, when theuseris a defence user, notifications are being sent to the prosecutor. This seems inverted. Typically, actions performed by a defence user should notify defence-related parties, not the prosecution.Apply this diff to correct the notification recipient logic:
- if (isDefenceUser(user)) { + if (isProsecutionUser(user)) { promises.push( this.sendEmail( subject, html, theCase.prosecutor?.name, theCase.prosecutor?.email, ), ) promises.push(this.sendSms(smsText, theCase.prosecutor?.mobileNumber)) }
Line range hint
2000-2010: Potential Miscommunication to Defence When User is ProsecutorIn the same method, when the
useris a prosecution user, an email is sent to the defender. This could lead to unintended information disclosure or miscommunication.Please verify whether notifying the defender when the prosecutor performs an action is intended. If not, consider revising the condition:
- if (isProsecutionUser(user) && theCase.defenderEmail) { + if (isDefenceUser(user) && theCase.defenderEmail) { const url = theCase.defenderNationalId && formatDefenderRoute(this.config.clientUrl, theCase.type, theCase.id) const defenderHtml = this.formatMessage( notifications.caseAppealedToCourtOfAppeals.body, { userHasAccessToRVG: Boolean(url), court: theCase.court?.name.replace('dómur', 'dómi'), courtCaseNumber: theCase.courtCaseNumber, linkStart: `<a href="${url}">`, linkEnd: '</a>', }, )
Line range hint
2218-2237: Incorrect Recipient in Appeal Statement NotificationsIn the
sendAppealStatementNotificationsmethod, when theuseris a defence user, an email is sent to the prosecutor withprosecutorHtml. This might not be the intended behavior, as defence actions should typically notify defence parties.Consider adjusting the notification logic to ensure emails are sent to appropriate recipients based on the user's role:
- if (isDefenceUser(user)) { + if (isProsecutionUser(user)) { const prosecutorHtml = this.formatMessage( notifications.caseAppealStatement.body, { userHasAccessToRVG: true, courtCaseNumber: theCase.courtCaseNumber, appealCaseNumber: theCase.appealCaseNumber ?? 'NONE', linkStart: `<a href="${this.config.clientUrl}${SIGNED_VERDICT_OVERVIEW_ROUTE}/${theCase.id}">`, linkEnd: '</a>', }, ) promises.push( this.sendEmail( subject, prosecutorHtml, theCase.prosecutor?.name, theCase.prosecutor?.email, ), ) }
Line range hint
2240-2265: Notifications Sent to Defender When User Is ProsecutorWhen the
useris a prosecution user, the method sends an email to the defender. This may not be appropriate, as it could result in unintended notifications being sent to the defence.Verify whether the defender should be notified when the prosecutor performs this action. If not, adjust the condition accordingly:
- if (isProsecutionUser(user) && theCase.defenderEmail) { + if (isDefenceUser(user) && theCase.defenderEmail) { const url = theCase.defenderNationalId && formatDefenderRoute(this.config.clientUrl, theCase.type, theCase.id) const defenderHtml = this.formatMessage( notifications.caseAppealStatement.body, { userHasAccessToRVG: Boolean(url), court: theCase.court?.name.replace('dómur', 'dómi'), courtCaseNumber: theCase.courtCaseNumber, appealCaseNumber: theCase.appealCaseNumber ?? 'NONE', linkStart: `<a href="${url}">`, linkEnd: '</a>', }, ) promises.push( this.sendEmail( subject, defenderHtml, theCase.defenderName, theCase.defenderEmail, undefined, !theCase.defenderNationalId, ), ) }
Line range hint
2323-2341: Inconsistent Notification Recipient in Case Files UpdatedIn the
sendAppealCaseFilesUpdatedNotificationsmethod, when theuseris a defence user, an email is sent to the prosecutor. This may not align with the expected notification flow.Adjust the condition to ensure that notifications are sent to the correct recipients based on the user's role:
- if (isDefenceUser(user)) { + if (isProsecutionUser(user)) { const prosecutorHtml = this.formatMessage( notifications.caseAppealCaseFilesUpdated.body, { courtCaseNumber: theCase.courtCaseNumber, appealCaseNumber: theCase.appealCaseNumber ?? 'NONE', linkStart: `<a href="${this.config.clientUrl}${SIGNED_VERDICT_OVERVIEW_ROUTE}/${theCase.id}">`, linkEnd: '</a>', }, ) promises.push( this.sendEmail( subject, prosecutorHtml, theCase.prosecutor?.name, theCase.prosecutor?.email, ), ) }
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/internalNotification.service.ts (10 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (1)
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/internalNotification.service.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/internalNotification.service.ts
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
…iles-added-notification
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (11)
apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Completed/Completed.tsx (1)
63-67: Approve changes with a suggestion for improved type safety.The changes in the
handleNextButtonClickfunction improve the logic by ensuring that the event log is only created when the upload is successful. This aligns well with the PR objectives of implementing a notification system for case file updates.To further enhance type safety, consider defining a union type for the possible return values of
handleUpload. This will make the code more robust and self-documenting.Consider adding a type definition for the
uploadResult:type UploadResult = 'ALL_SUCCEEDED' | 'PARTIAL_SUCCESS' | 'ALL_FAILED'; const uploadResult: UploadResult = await handleUpload( uploadFiles.filter((file) => file.percent === 0), updateUploadFile, );This will ensure that all possible return values from
handleUploadare properly handled.Also applies to: 67-76
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/internalNotification.service.ts (10)
Line range hint
165-198: LGTM with a minor suggestion: SMS sending logic is robustThe
sendSmsmethod effectively handles SMS sending for both production and non-production environments. It includes proper error handling and logging.Consider extracting the SMS tail message appending logic into a separate method for better readability and maintainability. For example:
private appendSmsTail(smsText: string): string { return smsText.match(/rettarvorslugatt.island.is/g) ? smsText : `${smsText} ${this.formatMessage(notifications.smsTail)}`; }Then you can use it in the
sendSmsmethod:smsText = this.appendSmsTail(smsText);
Line range hint
200-245: LGTM with a minor suggestion: iCalendar attachment creation is well-implementedThe
createICalAttachmentmethod effectively creates an iCalendar attachment for court dates, handling cases where the scheduled date might not be available. It includes all relevant information for the calendar event.Consider adding a check for the existence of
theCase.court?.namebefore using it in the location string. This can prevent potential undefined values in the location. For example:location: `${theCase.court?.name ?? 'Unknown Court'} - ${ scheduledDate.location ? `Dómsalur ${scheduledDate.location}` : 'Dómsalur hefur ekki verið skráður.' }`,
Line range hint
331-363: LGTM with a minor suggestion: "Ready for court" email notification to prosecutor is well-implementedThe
sendReadyForCourtEmailNotificationToProsecutormethod effectively creates and sends a "ready for court" email notification to the prosecutor. It correctly handles different case types and uses the appropriate overview URL.Consider extracting the URL generation logic into a separate method for better readability and maintainability. For example:
private getOverviewUrl(caseType: CaseType, caseId: string): string { return isRestrictionCase(caseType) ? `${this.config.clientUrl}${RESTRICTION_CASE_OVERVIEW_ROUTE}/${caseId}` : `${this.config.clientUrl}${INVESTIGATION_CASE_POLICE_CONFIRMATION_ROUTE}/${caseId}`; }Then you can use it in the method:
const overviewUrl = this.getOverviewUrl(type, id);
Line range hint
412-502: LGTM with a suggestion: Comprehensive "Ready for court" notifications handlingThe
sendReadyForCourtNotificationsmethod effectively orchestrates sending "ready for court" notifications to various parties based on different case types and scenarios. It handles multiple conditions and recipients appropriately.Consider breaking down this method into smaller, more focused methods to improve readability and maintainability. For example:
private async sendReadyForCourtNotifications(theCase: Case): Promise<DeliverResponse> { if (isIndictmentCase(theCase.type)) { return this.sendIndictmentCaseReadyForCourtNotifications(theCase); } return this.sendInvestigationOrRestrictionCaseReadyForCourtNotifications(theCase); } private async sendIndictmentCaseReadyForCourtNotifications(theCase: Case): Promise<DeliverResponse> { // ... handle indictment case notifications } private async sendInvestigationOrRestrictionCaseReadyForCourtNotifications(theCase: Case): Promise<DeliverResponse> { // ... handle investigation or restriction case notifications }This refactoring would make the code easier to understand and maintain, as each method would focus on a specific case type or scenario.
Line range hint
538-568: LGTM with a minor suggestion: Court date invitation email upload is well-implementedThe
uploadCourtDateInvitationEmailToCourtmethod effectively handles the upload of court date invitation emails to the court's system. It includes proper error handling and logging.Consider adding a return value to indicate whether the upload was successful. This could be useful for the calling method to know if the upload succeeded. For example:
private async uploadCourtDateInvitationEmailToCourt( // ... existing parameters ): Promise<boolean> { try { await this.courtService.createEmail( // ... existing parameters ) return true; } catch (error) { this.logger.warn( `Failed to upload email to court for case ${theCase.id}`, { error }, ) return false; } }This way, the calling method can check if the upload was successful and potentially take additional actions if needed.
Line range hint
616-657: LGTM with a minor suggestion: Court date email notification to prison is comprehensiveThe
sendCourtDateEmailNotificationToPrisonmethod effectively creates and sends a court date email notification to the prison. It handles various case details and scenarios, including custody restrictions and parent cases.Consider extracting the logic for determining the defendant's gender into a separate method for better readability. For example:
private getDefendantGender(defendants: Defendant[] | undefined): string | undefined { return defendants && defendants.length > 0 ? defendants[0].gender : undefined; }Then you can use it in the method:
const defendantGender = this.getDefendantGender(theCase.defendants);This would make the main method slightly cleaner and easier to read.
Line range hint
709-748: LGTM with a minor suggestion: Court date email notification to defender is well-implementedThe
sendCourtDateEmailNotificationToDefendermethod effectively creates and sends a court date email notification to the defender. It handles different scenarios based on the case type and request sharing status, and properly manages cases where the defender might not have a national ID.Consider extracting the subject line determination logic into a separate method for better readability. For example:
private getDefenderCourtDateEmailSubject(theCase: Case): string { const prefix = (theCase.requestSharedWithDefender === RequestSharedWithDefender.READY_FOR_COURT || theCase.requestSharedWithDefender === RequestSharedWithDefender.COURT_DATE) ? 'Krafa í máli' : 'Yfirlit máls'; return `${prefix} ${theCase.courtCaseNumber}`; }Then you can use it in the method:
const subject = this.getDefenderCourtDateEmailSubject(theCase);This would make the main method slightly cleaner and easier to read.
Line range hint
787-834: LGTM with a suggestion: Court date email notifications for indictment cases are comprehensiveThe
sendCourtDateEmailNotificationForIndictmentCasemethod effectively orchestrates sending court date email notifications for indictment cases. It handles multiple recipients, including prosecutors and defendants, and creates a calendar invite attachment when applicable.Consider using Promise.all() to send notifications to all recipients concurrently, which could improve performance. For example:
const recipientPromises = [ this.sendPostponedCourtDateEmailNotificationForIndictmentCase( theCase, user, courtDate, calendarInvite, `${this.config.clientUrl}${INDICTMENTS_OVERVIEW_ROUTE}/${theCase.id}`, theCase.prosecutor?.name, theCase.prosecutor?.email, ), ...uniqueDefendants.map(defendant => this.sendPostponedCourtDateEmailNotificationForIndictmentCase( theCase, user, courtDate, calendarInvite, defendant.defenderNationalId && formatDefenderRoute( this.config.clientUrl, theCase.type, theCase.id, ), defendant.defenderName, defendant.defenderEmail, ) ) ]; return Promise.all(recipientPromises);This approach would send all notifications in parallel, potentially reducing the overall execution time of the method.
Line range hint
836-925: LGTM with a suggestion: Comprehensive court date notifications handlingThe
sendCourtDateNotificationsmethod effectively orchestrates sending court date notifications for various case types and recipients. It handles different scenarios and conditions appropriately, demonstrating a good understanding of the business logic.Consider breaking down this method into smaller, more focused methods to improve readability and maintainability. For example:
private async sendCourtDateNotifications(theCase: Case, user: User): Promise<DeliverResponse> { this.eventService.postEvent('SCHEDULE_COURT_DATE', theCase); if (isIndictmentCase(theCase.type)) { return this.sendIndictmentCaseCourtDateNotifications(theCase, user); } return this.sendNonIndictmentCaseCourtDateNotifications(theCase, user); } private async sendIndictmentCaseCourtDateNotifications(theCase: Case, user: User): Promise<DeliverResponse> { // ... handle indictment case notifications } private async sendNonIndictmentCaseCourtDateNotifications(theCase: Case, user: User): Promise<DeliverResponse> { // ... handle non-indictment case notifications }This refactoring would make the code easier to understand and maintain, as each method would focus on a specific case type or scenario. It would also make it easier to add new notification types or modify existing ones in the future.
Line range hint
928-968: LGTM with a minor suggestion: Ruling email notification to prosecutor is well-implementedThe
sendRulingEmailNotificationToProsecutormethod effectively creates and sends a ruling email notification to the prosecutor. It handles different case types appropriately and includes relevant links in the email body.Consider extracting the subject and body determination logic into separate methods for better readability. For example:
private getRulingEmailSubject(theCase: Case): string { return isIndictmentCase(theCase.type) ? this.formatMessage(notifications.caseCompleted.subject, { courtCaseNumber: theCase.courtCaseNumber, }) : this.formatMessage(notifications.signedRuling.subject, { courtCaseNumber: theCase.courtCaseNumber, isModifyingRuling: Boolean(theCase.rulingModifiedHistory), }); } </blockquote></details> </blockquote></details> <details> <summary>📜 Review details</summary> **Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml** **Review profile: CHILL** <details> <summary>📥 Commits</summary> Files that changed from the base of the PR and between c26551579a907e7bc2a0ad2c151cf3caca096538 and d5d7861db313cb5321d4af72d1320bf0ef24ba41. </details> <details> <summary>📒 Files selected for processing (3)</summary> * apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/internalNotification.service.ts (10 hunks) * apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Completed/Completed.tsx (1 hunks) * libs/judicial-system/types/src/lib/notification.ts (1 hunks) </details> <details> <summary>🧰 Additional context used</summary> <details> <summary>📓 Path-based instructions (3)</summary><blockquote> <details> <summary>apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/internalNotification.service.ts (1)</summary> Pattern `apps/**/*`: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following: - NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods. - Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques. - Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety." </details> <details> <summary>apps/judicial-system/web/src/routes/Court/Indictments/Completed/Completed.tsx (1)</summary> Pattern `apps/**/*`: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following: - NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods. - Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques. - Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety." </details> <details> <summary>libs/judicial-system/types/src/lib/notification.ts (1)</summary> Pattern `libs/**/*`: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following: - Reusability of components and hooks across different NextJS apps. - TypeScript usage for defining props and exporting types. - Effective tree-shaking and bundling practices." </details> </blockquote></details> <details> <summary>📓 Learnings (1)</summary><blockquote> <details> <summary>apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/internalNotification.service.ts (1)</summary><blockquote>Learnt from: gudjong
PR: #16452
File: apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/internalNotification.service.ts:1845-1854
Timestamp: 2024-10-22T15:25:50.536Z
Learning: In thesendCaseFilesUpdatedNotificationsmethod withininternalNotification.service.ts, when theuseris a defence user, it is intended to send notifications to the prosecutor.</blockquote></details> </blockquote></details> </details> <details> <summary>🔇 Additional comments (17)</summary><blockquote> <details> <summary>libs/judicial-system/types/src/lib/notification.ts (1)</summary><blockquote> `21-21`: **LGTM! Verify usage across the codebase.** The addition of `CASE_FILES_UPDATED` to the `NotificationType` enum aligns well with the PR objectives. The change adheres to the coding guidelines for reusability and TypeScript usage. To ensure this new enum value is being used correctly, let's verify its usage across the codebase: <details> <summary>✅ Verification successful</summary> <!-- [monologue] [task verify_usage_1/1] Review the output from the shell scripts to verify the usage of `CASE_FILES_UPDATED` across the codebase. [observations] - The `CASE_FILES_UPDATED` enum is used in multiple files, including both frontend (`.tsx`) and backend (`.ts`) components. - It is utilized in sending notifications, handling cases in switch statements, and within guards. - The usage appears consistent and aligns with the purpose of the enum. - No instances of deprecated or incorrect usage are evident from the output. [analysis] The extensive and appropriate usage of `CASE_FILES_UPDATED` across the codebase indicates that the addition is well-integrated and adheres to the project's standards. There are no signs of misuse or overlooked areas that require immediate attention. The enum serves its intended purpose without introducing conflicts or redundancies. [actions] Conclude the verification process by approving the changes, as the new enum value is correctly implemented and utilized throughout the codebase. --> **Verified!** The `CASE_FILES_UPDATED` enum is appropriately used across the codebase without issues. </details> <details> <summary>🏁 Scripts executed</summary> The following scripts were executed for the analysis: Script: ```shell #!/bin/bash # Description: Check for usage of the new CASE_FILES_UPDATED notification type # Search for direct usage of CASE_FILES_UPDATED echo "Direct usage of CASE_FILES_UPDATED:" rg "CASE_FILES_UPDATED" --type ts # Search for switch statements or if-else blocks that might need updating echo "\nPotential switch statements or if-else blocks to update:" rg "switch.*NotificationType|if.*NotificationType" --type tsLength of output: 8715
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/internalNotification.service.ts (16)
Line range hint
1-80: LGTM: Import statements are well-organizedThe import statements are logically grouped and include all necessary modules and types for the functionality of this service.
Line range hint
81-124: LGTM: Class declaration and constructor follow best practicesThe
InternalNotificationServiceclass is properly decorated with@Injectable()and extendsBaseNotificationService. The constructor uses dependency injection for all required services, following best practices for Angular/NestJS applications.
Line range hint
126-149: LGTM: Comprehensive logic for determining prison notificationsThe
shouldSendNotificationToPrisonmethod effectively handles various case types and conditions to determine when a notification should be sent to the prison. The logic is clear and covers different scenarios appropriately.
Line range hint
151-163: LGTM: Utility methods for retrieving court contact informationThe
getCourtMobileNumbers,getCourtAssistantMobileNumbers, andgetCourtEmailmethods are concise and effectively retrieve the necessary contact information for courts. They properly handle cases where thecourtIdmight be undefined.
Line range hint
248-262: LGTM: Heads-up SMS notification to court is well-implementedThe
sendHeadsUpSmsNotificationToCourtmethod effectively creates and sends a heads-up SMS notification to the court. It utilizes theformatCourtHeadsUpSmsNotificationfunction for message creation and thesendSmsmethod for sending, demonstrating good separation of concerns.
Line range hint
264-274: LGTM: Heads-up notifications method is concise and effectiveThe
sendHeadsUpNotificationsmethod efficiently handles the process of sending heads-up notifications for a case. It appropriately calls thesendHeadsUpSmsNotificationToCourtmethod and records the notification usingrecordNotification, ensuring proper logging of the sent notification.
Line range hint
277-290: LGTM: "Ready for court" SMS notification to court is well-implementedThe
sendReadyForCourtSmsNotificationToCourtmethod effectively creates and sends a "ready for court" SMS notification to the court. It utilizes theformatCourtReadyForCourtSmsNotificationfunction for message creation and thesendSmsmethod for sending, maintaining consistency with other similar methods in the class.
Line range hint
292-303: LGTM: "Resubmitted to court" SMS notification method is consistent and effectiveThe
sendResubmittedToCourtSmsNotificationToCourtmethod maintains consistency with other SMS notification methods in the class. It appropriately uses theformatCourtResubmittedToCourtSmsNotificationfunction for message creation and thesendSmsmethod for sending the notification to the court.
Line range hint
305-329: LGTM: "Resubmitted to court" email notification to defender is well-implementedThe
sendResubmittedToCourtEmailNotificationToDefendermethod effectively creates and sends a "resubmitted to court" email notification to the defender. It properly handles cases where the defender might not have a national ID and uses theformatDefenderResubmittedToCourtEmailNotificationfunction for message creation. The method maintains consistency with other email notification methods in the class.
Line range hint
365-385: LGTM: "Ready for court" email notification to court is well-implementedThe
sendReadyForCourtEmailNotificationToCourtmethod effectively creates and sends a "ready for court" email notification to the court. It appropriately uses theformatCourtIndictmentReadyForCourtEmailNotificationfunction for message creation and maintains consistency with other email notification methods in the class.
Line range hint
387-410: LGTM: "Ready for court" email notification to defender is well-implementedThe
sendReadyForCourtEmailNotificationToDefendermethod effectively creates and sends a "ready for court" email notification to the defender. It properly handles cases where the defender might not have a national ID and uses theformatDefenderReadyForCourtEmailNotificationfunction for message creation. The method maintains consistency with other email notification methods in the class.
Line range hint
505-520: LGTM: "Received by court" SMS notification to prosecutor is well-implementedThe
sendReceivedByCourtSmsNotificationToProsecutormethod effectively creates and sends a "received by court" SMS notification to the prosecutor. It appropriately uses theformatProsecutorReceivedByCourtSmsNotificationfunction for message creation and maintains consistency with other SMS notification methods in the class.
Line range hint
522-535: LGTM: "Received by court" notifications method is concise and effectiveThe
sendReceivedByCourtNotificationsmethod efficiently handles the process of sending "received by court" notifications. It appropriately calls thesendReceivedByCourtSmsNotificationToProsecutormethod and records the notification usingrecordNotification, ensuring proper logging of the sent notification.
Line range hint
570-614: LGTM: Court date email notification to prosecutor is well-implementedThe
sendCourtDateEmailNotificationToProsecutormethod effectively creates and sends a court date email notification to the prosecutor. It handles different session arrangements correctly, creates a calendar invite attachment when applicable, and uploads the email to the court's system. The method demonstrates good separation of concerns and error handling.
Line range hint
659-707: LGTM: Court date calendar invite email notification to defender is well-implementedThe
sendCourtDateCalendarInviteEmailNotificationToDefendermethod effectively creates and sends a court date calendar invite email notification to the defender. It handles various case details, creates a calendar invite attachment, and uploads the email to the court's system. The method demonstrates good separation of concerns and error handling.
Line range hint
750-785: LGTM: Postponed court date email notification for indictment cases is well-implementedThe
sendPostponedCourtDateEmailNotificationForIndictmentCasemethod effectively creates and sends a postponed court date email notification for indictment cases. It handles various recipients, properly manages cases where the recipient might not have access to RVG, and uploads the email to the court's system. The method demonstrates good error handling and separation of concerns.
gudjong
added
automerge
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/test/internalNotificationController/sendCaseFilesUpdatedNotifications.spec.ts (1)
82-116: Consider adding negative test cases.The current test cases thoroughly verify the happy path for prosecutor-initiated notifications. However, consider adding test cases for:
- Missing recipient information
- Failed email delivery scenarios
- Invalid case data
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (3)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/messages/notifications.ts (1 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/internalNotification.service.ts (10 hunks)
- apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/test/internalNotificationController/sendCaseFilesUpdatedNotifications.spec.ts (1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (3)
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/messages/notifications.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/internalNotification.service.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/test/internalNotificationController/sendCaseFilesUpdatedNotifications.spec.ts (1)
Pattern
apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:
- NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
- Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
- Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
📓 Learnings (2)
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/internalNotification.service.ts (1)
Learnt from: gudjong PR: island-is/island.is#16452 File: apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/internalNotification.service.ts:1845-1854 Timestamp: 2024-10-22T15:25:50.536Z Learning: In the `sendCaseFilesUpdatedNotifications` method within `internalNotification.service.ts`, when the `user` is a defence user, it is intended to send notifications to the prosecutor.apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/test/internalNotificationController/sendCaseFilesUpdatedNotifications.spec.ts (1)
Learnt from: gudjong PR: island-is/island.is#16452 File: apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/internalNotification.service.ts:1845-1854 Timestamp: 2024-10-22T15:25:50.536Z Learning: In the `sendCaseFilesUpdatedNotifications` method within `internalNotification.service.ts`, when the `user` is a defence user, it is intended to send notifications to the prosecutor.
🪛 Biome
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/test/internalNotificationController/sendCaseFilesUpdatedNotifications.spec.ts
[error] 75-76: The assignment should not be in an expression.
The use of assignments in expressions is confusing.
Expressions are often considered as side-effect free.(lint/suspicious/noAssignInExpressions)
[error] 76-77: The assignment should not be in an expression.
The use of assignments in expressions is confusing.
Expressions are often considered as side-effect free.(lint/suspicious/noAssignInExpressions)
🔇 Additional comments (7)
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/test/internalNotificationController/sendCaseFilesUpdatedNotifications.spec.ts (2)
1-23: LGTM! Well-structured imports and interfaces.The imports are organized logically, and the interfaces are well-defined.
118-151: LGTM! Well-structured defender notification tests.The test cases correctly verify that:
- Notifications are sent to all relevant parties
- Role-specific URLs are used in the notifications
- The prosecutor is notified when a defender adds files (as confirmed by retrieved learning)
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/messages/notifications.ts (1)
862-874: LGTM! The new message definition follows best practices.The
caseFilesUpdatedmessage object is well-structured with:
- Proper internationalization support
- Clear descriptions for translators
- Consistent variable usage
- Conditional text handling for different user access levels
apps/judicial-system/backend/src/app/modules/notification/internalNotification.service.ts (4)
77-81: LGTM: Imports are well-structuredThe new imports for handling civil claimants and defendants are properly organized and necessary for the new case files notification functionality.
1767-1786: LGTM: Well-structured notification methodThe method properly handles email formatting and recipient details, with appropriate handling of RVG access links.
2682-2683: LGTM: Proper integration with notification systemThe new notification type is correctly integrated into the existing switch statement, maintaining consistency with other notification types.
1788-1873: Consider adding error handling for missing court case numberThe method uses
theCase.courtCaseNumberdirectly in notifications without checking if it's defined. While it's likely always set at this point, defensive programming would be beneficial.Apply this diff to add a safety check:
private async sendCaseFilesUpdatedNotifications( theCase: Case, user: User, ): Promise<DeliverResponse> { + if (!theCase.courtCaseNumber) { + this.logger.warn('Missing court case number for notification', { caseId: theCase.id }) + return { delivered: false } + } const promises = [ this.sendCaseFilesUpdatedNotification(Verify notification access control
The implementation includes specific logic for prosecution and defence users. Let's verify this aligns with the system's access control requirements.
✅ Verification successful
Based on the search results, I can now provide a final response since I have enough context about the access control implementation for notifications in the codebase.
Access control for notifications is properly implemented
The code correctly implements role-based access control for notifications:
- For prosecution users (
isProsecutionUser): Sends notifications to defendants and their defenders- For defence users (
isDefenceUser): Sends notifications to prosecutors- For both roles: Sends notifications to judges and spokespersons
The implementation aligns with the system's access control requirements as evidenced by consistent role checks across the codebase, particularly in:
- Frontend components for displaying notifications
- Backend services for sending notifications
- File access guards
- Case access filters
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify access control implementation for notifications # Test: Search for other notification types with similar user role checks rg -A 5 "isProsecutionUser\(user\)" --type ts rg -A 5 "isDefenceUser\(user\)" --type tsLength of output: 65658
...s/notification/test/internalNotificationController/sendCaseFilesUpdatedNotifications.spec.ts
Show resolved
Hide resolved
* Refactors file upload to return more granular upload result * Sends case files updated notification from client when files are added * Sends notifications when case files are added to an indictment case * Reverts debugging * Fixes naming * Fixes naming * Fixes notification type when storing notification result * Fixes court name and unit tests --------- Co-authored-by: kodiakhq[bot] <49736102+kodiakhq[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Case Files Added Notification
Gagnaframlagning - tilkynning til aðila máls
What
Why
Checklist:
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Bug Fixes
Tests