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

Feature/løsner validering #496

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Conversation

pekern
Copy link
Contributor

@pekern pekern commented Apr 26, 2024

No description provided.

@pekern pekern requested review from a team as code owners April 26, 2024 13:17
@pekern pekern requested a review from espenjv April 26, 2024 13:17
@pekern pekern force-pushed the feature/løsner-validering branch from 63dee1e to e8005cf Compare April 26, 2024 13:18
@@ -75,7 +75,7 @@ private static void verifiserOpprettetAndel(BeregningsgrunnlagPrStatusOgAndelDto
Objects.requireNonNull(andel.getBeregningsperiodeFom(), "BeregningsperiodeFom " + andel);
Objects.requireNonNull(andel.getBeregningsperiodeTom(), "BeregningsperiodeTom " + andel);
}
if (andel.getBgAndelArbeidsforhold().isPresent()) {
if (andel.getBgAndelArbeidsforhold().isPresent() && andel.getKilde().equals(AndelKilde.PROSESS_START)) {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Kan ikke andel.getKilde() gi deg null her - ref sjekk i forrige if ?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@pekern pekern Apr 29, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Kilde er aldri null, så hadde ikke trengt sjekken over. men har diskutert med Espen og vi prøver heller å fjerne så mye som mulig av arbeidsperiode istedenfor. Kommer i ny PR

@pekern pekern closed this Apr 29, 2024
@pekern pekern deleted the feature/løsner-validering branch April 29, 2024 08:26
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants