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

feat(organization): backfill Asset search field for owner label TASK-1334 #5391

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Dec 20, 2024

Conversation

noliveleger
Copy link
Contributor

@noliveleger noliveleger commented Dec 19, 2024

📣 Summary

Populated the asset search field to include the owner username and organization name for improved search functionality.

📖 Description

The asset search field has been updated to include tthe owner username and organization name, ensuring better usability when searching for asset owner labels. This backfill operation populates the field for existing assets where the owner label was previously missing.

@noliveleger noliveleger changed the title 1334 back fill asset search field for owner label TASK-1334 feat(organization): backfill Asset search field for owner label Dec 19, 2024
@noliveleger noliveleger self-assigned this Dec 19, 2024
@noliveleger noliveleger requested a review from Guitlle December 19, 2024 21:29
@noliveleger noliveleger marked this pull request as ready for review December 19, 2024 21:29
@noliveleger noliveleger requested a review from jnm as a code owner December 19, 2024 21:29
@noliveleger noliveleger removed the request for review from jnm December 19, 2024 21:29
@noliveleger noliveleger changed the title feat(organization): backfill Asset search field for owner label feat(organization): backfill Asset search field for owner label TASK-1334 Dec 19, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

@Guitlle Guitlle left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It looks good, though I did not test the migration scripts on my local env

from kpi.models.asset import Asset


def run():
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Should we have unit tests for at least some of these migrations? Though, I would expect them to get tested when devs pull from main and the local environment executes them from time to time. But maybe just for QA purposes, either having unit tests or reproducible previews.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We decided to do simple tests (e.g.: validate the data is correctly added) in another PR.

Copy link
Contributor

@Guitlle Guitlle left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good, but I didn't test the long running migration

@noliveleger noliveleger merged commit 6f8c46a into main Dec 20, 2024
4 checks passed
@noliveleger noliveleger deleted the 1334-back-fill-asset-search-field-for-owner-label branch December 20, 2024 00:53
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants