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

Minor refactoring - Design level refactors #2781

Open
wants to merge 9 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

HimanshiVerma05
Copy link

@HimanshiVerma05 HimanshiVerma05 commented Mar 29, 2024

Checklist
  • the [individual contributor license agreement][] is signed
  • commit message follows [commit guidelines][]
  • tests are included
Description of change

Refactored the code and worked on the comments-
"// Should refactor this switch to instead choose a service and invoke a method on it"
" // These 2 should be (public) constants on their respective service classes, not here"
in PagsService.java .

@ChristianMurphy ChristianMurphy requested a review from a team March 29, 2024 16:39
@HimanshiVerma05 HimanshiVerma05 changed the title Minor refactoring - Replace conditional with polymorphism. Minor refactoring - Design level refactors Mar 31, 2024
himanshi added 2 commits March 31, 2024 22:05
…hods from the PortletEventCoordinatationService into a new class named PortletEventCoordinationHelper.
…hods from the PortletEventCoordinatationService into a new class named PortletEventCoordinationHelper.
Copy link
Member

@ChristianMurphy ChristianMurphy left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks @HimanshiVerma05!
The code looks good from reading through it.
My caution comes from this touching the PAGS and Layout subsystems, which aren't as heavily tested as I'd like while also being rather complex subsystems. Those still require some manual testing.

I've CC'ed other maintainers are reviewers to see if anyone could run some manual tests.


Some general tips:

  • New tests are the quickest type of change to review
  • PRs that adjust store are easier to review when they focus on one or a few subsystems, and/or a single type of refactor at a time.
  • Features are also welcome, those are often mentioned/discussed on the mail list before they are added https://groups.google.com/a/apereo.org/g/uportal-dev

@ChristianMurphy ChristianMurphy requested a review from a team April 1, 2024 13:42
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.

None yet

2 participants