Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Mar 24, 2023. It is now read-only.

Fix/scan levels #154

Merged
merged 21 commits into from
Jan 18, 2023
Merged

Fix/scan levels #154

merged 21 commits into from
Jan 18, 2023

Conversation

Donnype
Copy link
Contributor

@Donnype Donnype commented Jan 17, 2023

Changes

Backend checks on current permissions setup for changing scan levels. This is the best I could do in a short time but could use a better setup (either mixins or using django permissions).

Issue ticket number and link

Popped up in #86.

Proof

One of the pages after removing an indemnification:
image

Checklist for author(s):

  • This PR comes from a feature or hotfix branch, in line with our git branching strategy;
  • I have squashed all commits before merging this PR;
  • This PR is "bite-sized" and only focuses on a single issue, problem, or feature;
  • If a non-trivial PR: This PR is properly linked to an issue on the project board;
  • If a non-trivial PR: I have added screenshots or some other proof that my code does what it is supposed to do;
  • I am not reinventing the wheel: there is no high-quality library that already has this feature;
  • I have changed the example .env files if I added, removed, or changed any config options, and I have informed others that they need to modify their .env files if required;
  • I have performed a self-review of my own code;
  • I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas;
  • I have made corresponding changes to the documentation, if necessary;
  • I have written unit, integration, and end-to-end tests for the change that I made;
## Checklist for functional reviewer(s):
- [ ] If a non-trivial PR: This PR is properly linked to an issue on the project board;
- [ ] I have checked out this branch, and successfully ran `make kat`;
- [ ] I have ran `make test-rf` and all end-to-end Robot Framework tests pass;
- [ ] I confirmed that the PR's advertised `feature` or `hotfix` works as intended;
- [ ] I confirmed that there are no unintended functional regressions in this branch;

### What works:
* _bullet point + screenshot (if useful) per tested functionality_

### What doesn't work:
* _bullet point + screenshot (if useful) per tested functionality_

### Bug or feature?:
* _bullet point + screenshot (if useful) if it is unclear whether something is a bug or an intended feature._
## Checklist for code reviewer(s):
- [ ] The code passes the CI tests and linters;
- [ ] The code does not bypass authentication or security mechanisms;
- [ ] The code does not introduce any dependency on a library that has not been properly vetted;
- [ ] The code does not violate Model-View-Template and our other architectural principles;
- [ ] The code contains docstrings, comments, and documentation where needed;
- [ ] The code prioritizes readability over performance where appropriate;
- [ ] The code conforms to our agreed coding standards.

@Donnype Donnype requested a review from a team as a code owner January 17, 2023 17:24
Copy link
Contributor

@underdarknl underdarknl left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

please create a new ticket for refactoring this into a method on the user or OOI model instead.

@underdarknl underdarknl merged commit 92fe6d0 into main Jan 18, 2023
@underdarknl underdarknl deleted the feature/multi-select branch January 18, 2023 09:26
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants