fix/removed schema type selector from all pages

[sujitaw]

What

• removed all/org schema selector from all pages

---

Important

Removed schema type selector from multiple components, including BulkIssuance.tsx, Issuance.tsx, EmaiIssuanceCard.tsx, and SchemaList.tsx.

• Behavior:
  • Removed schema type selector from BulkIssuance.tsx, Issuance.tsx, EmaiIssuanceCard.tsx, and SchemaList.tsx.
  • Commented out related code blocks that handle schema type selection.
• Imports:
  • Removed unused imports related to schema selection in BulkIssuance.tsx, Issuance.tsx, and EmaiIssuanceCard.tsx.
• State Management:
  • Removed state variables related to schema selection in BulkIssuance.tsx, Issuance.tsx, and SchemaList.tsx.

^{This description was created by for a600060. You can customize this summary. It will automatically update as commits are pushed.}

[ellipsis-dev]

Caution

Changes requested ❌

Reviewed everything up to 2b19387 in 2 minutes and 11 seconds. Click for details.

• Reviewed 350 lines of code in 4 files
• Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 18 draft comments. View those below.
• Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.

1. src/features/organization/bulkIssuance/components/BulkIssuance.tsx:19

• Draft comment:
  Removed import of 'handleReset'—confirm that this function is no longer needed after dropping the schema type selector.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was on unchanged code.

2. src/features/organization/bulkIssuance/components/BulkIssuance.tsx:74

• Draft comment:
  The constant 'optionsWithDefault' has been removed. If this was only used for the schema selector, this cleanup is appropriate.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment did not seem useful. Confidence is useful = 0% <= threshold 50% The comment is asking the PR author to confirm the usage of a removed constant. This is not a specific code suggestion or a request for a test, and it doesn't provide a clear alternative or improvement. It violates the rule against asking the author to confirm their intention.

3. src/features/organization/bulkIssuance/components/BulkIssuance.tsx:305

• Draft comment:
  The 'handleFilterChange' function is commented out. If the schema selector is permanently removed, consider deleting this commented code instead of leaving it.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50% The code is explicitly marked as temporary with a clear intention to work on it later. This isn't abandoned or dead code - it's intentionally preserved for upcoming work. The comment suggests permanent removal when the code is intentionally being kept for future use. This violates the rule about not making speculative comments. The comment could be valid if this was truly dead code, and keeping the codebase clean is important. Maybe the "temporary" comment is misleading and this really should be removed? No, the consistent "Temporarily commented" messages and the removal of related code (imports, component usage) shows this was an intentional temporary commenting out, not dead code that should be removed. The comment should be deleted because it suggests removing code that is intentionally preserved for future work, and makes a speculative suggestion without strong evidence that the code should be permanently removed.

4. src/features/organization/bulkIssuance/components/BulkIssuance.tsx:389

• Draft comment:
  The SchemaSelectBulk component rendering is temporarily commented out. Remove this commented block if the schema type selector is no longer required.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50% While the comment correctly identifies commented code, it's marked as "temporarily commented will be worked on later" which suggests it's intentionally kept for future work. The comment is asking for something that may be premature since the code comment explicitly states it will be worked on later. We should trust the developer's intention here. The comment could be wrong if this code is intentionally kept for imminent future work. Removing it now could cause problems for planned upcoming changes. Given the explicit "will be worked on later" note in the code, this is likely temporary and intentional. The comment is suggesting an action that could interfere with planned work. The comment should be deleted since it's suggesting removal of code that is explicitly marked as temporary and planned for future work.

5. src/features/organization/connectionIssuance/components/Issuance.tsx:77

• Draft comment:
  Similarly, the 'clear' state is now defined without its setter. Double-check if it’s still needed for the SearchableSelect component.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment did not seem useful. Confidence is useful = 0% <= threshold 50% The comment is asking the PR author to double-check if the 'clear' state is still needed, which violates the rule against asking the author to confirm or double-check things. It doesn't provide a specific suggestion or point out a clear issue.

6. src/features/organization/connectionIssuance/components/Issuance.tsx:328

• Draft comment:
  The handleFilterChange function is commented out here. If the filter functionality is no longer required, it is better removed rather than left commented.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50% The code is explicitly marked as temporary with a note saying it will be worked on later. This suggests it's intentionally commented out as part of work in progress. The comment is technically correct that removing commented code is better, but in this case there appears to be an intentional plan to work on this code later. Making this comment could disrupt the development workflow. The comment makes a valid point about code cleanliness. Commented out code can become stale and forgotten if left too long. However, temporary commented code can be a valid development technique when actively working on features. The explicit "will be worked on later" note indicates this is intentional and temporary. The comment should be deleted since the commented code appears to be an intentional temporary state with plans to work on it later.

7. src/features/organization/connectionIssuance/components/Issuance.tsx:361

• Draft comment:
  The SchemaSelect component block is commented out. If this selector is fully removed, it should be cleaned up to avoid clutter.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment looked like it was already resolved.

8. src/features/organization/emailIssuance/components/EmaiIssuanceCard.tsx:11

• Draft comment:
  Props related to the schema type selector ('allSchema', 'handleFilterChange', 'optionsWithDefault') are now commented out. Consider removing these unused props if the selector is permanently removed.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 10% vs. threshold = 50% The code explicitly states this is a temporary comment-out with "will be worked on later". The props are likely kept commented rather than removed because they will be needed when the SchemaSelect component is restored. Suggesting their removal could create extra work when the temporary change is reverted. The comment assumes the code removal is permanent when there's explicit evidence it's temporary. However, keeping commented code long-term is generally bad practice. Given the explicit "temporary" note, suggesting removal of the props now would be premature and could make future work harder when the feature is restored. The comment should be deleted since it suggests a change that conflicts with the documented temporary nature of the code changes.

9. src/features/organization/emailIssuance/components/EmaiIssuanceCard.tsx:35

• Draft comment:
  The block rendering SchemaSelect is commented out. If the schema selector is no longer needed, remove this commented code to clean up the component.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50% The comment suggests a valid code cleanup by removing commented code. However, the comment in the code explicitly states this is temporary and will be worked on later, suggesting this is an intentional temporary state. The PR author seems to be in the middle of a refactor where this code will be needed again soon. The comment might be premature since the code comment indicates this is an intentional temporary state. We might be interfering with an ongoing development process. While keeping commented code is generally bad practice, in this case there's explicit indication this is temporary during active development. Given the explicit "will be worked on later" comment, this automated suggestion to remove the code is likely to be unhelpful and should be removed.

10. src/features/schemas/components/SchemaList.tsx:295

• Draft comment:
  The handleFilterChange function is commented out. If filtering by schema type isn’t needed anymore, consider permanently removing this block.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50% The code is explicitly marked as temporary with "will be worked on later". The author has intentionally kept this code for future reference and implementation. The comment suggests removing code that the author specifically wants to keep. This violates the principle of not questioning the author's clear intentions. The comment could be right that this code may never be needed again. Dead code can accumulate if temporary comments are never revisited. However, the author has made their intention clear with the comment. If they want to keep it as a reference for upcoming work, we should respect that decision rather than second-guess it. The comment should be deleted since it questions an intentional decision by the author to temporarily comment out code they plan to work on later.

11. src/features/schemas/components/SchemaList.tsx:408

• Draft comment:
  The Select component block for choosing schema type is commented out. Remove it if the functionality has been deprecated.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 10% vs. threshold = 50% The code is explicitly marked as temporary with a clear intention to work on it later. This isn't dead code that's been abandoned - it's an intentional temporary comment-out with plans to revisit. The comment asking to remove it goes against the developer's stated intention to work on this later. Maybe the code has been commented out for too long and should be removed? Maybe there's a ticket or PR that shows this won't actually be worked on later? Without additional context about how long this has been commented out or evidence that it won't be worked on, we should respect the explicit developer comment indicating this is temporary. The comment suggesting removal is not appropriate since the code is explicitly marked as temporary with plans to work on it later. This appears to be an intentional temporary state, not dead code.

12. src/features/schemas/components/SchemaList.tsx:408

• Draft comment:
  The comment contains a minor typo ('will we worked' instead of 'will be worked'); please correct for clarity.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment looked like it was already resolved.

13. src/features/organization/bulkIssuance/components/BulkIssuance.tsx:305

• Draft comment:
  Typographical issue on this line: the comment text "Temporarily commented will be worked on later /" has a stray '/'. Also consider rephrasing it to something like "Temporarily commented out; will be worked on later".
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 10% vs. threshold = 50% While the comment is technically correct about the stray "*/" and awkward phrasing, this is an extremely minor formatting issue on a temporary comment. The code itself works fine and the comment is meant to be temporary anyway. This feels like unnecessary nitpicking that doesn't improve code quality in any meaningful way. The comment is factually accurate and does point out a real issue with comment formatting. Poor comment formatting could be seen as reducing code readability. Given this is explicitly marked as temporary code/comments that "will be worked on later", spending time fixing the formatting of a comment that will be removed soon anyway is not a good use of developer time. This comment, while technically correct, focuses on an extremely minor formatting issue in temporary code. It should be deleted as it doesn't provide meaningful value.

14. src/features/organization/bulkIssuance/components/BulkIssuance.tsx:401

• Draft comment:
  There's a stray closing comment token ('*/') at the end of this line (line 401). Please remove it to avoid syntax issues since there is no matching opening comment.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment looked like it was already resolved.

15. src/features/organization/connectionIssuance/components/Issuance.tsx:328

• Draft comment:
  Typo: The comment text 'Temporarily commented will be worked on later' is a bit unclear. Consider rewording it to 'Temporarily commented out; will be worked on later' for clarity.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 10% vs. threshold = 50% While the suggested rewording is technically more grammatically correct, this is just a temporary comment that will be removed when the code is uncommented. The meaning is already clear enough. This kind of minor wording suggestion doesn't warrant a PR comment since it doesn't affect functionality and the current wording is understandable. The comment does point out a real grammatical improvement. Poor code comments can sometimes lead to confusion. However, this is clearly marked as temporary code and the meaning is already clear enough. The minor grammatical improvement doesn't justify the overhead of a PR comment. Delete this comment as it suggests a trivial wording change to a temporary comment that will be removed anyway.

16. src/features/organization/emailIssuance/components/EmaiIssuanceCard.tsx:35

• Draft comment:
  There's a small typographical/wording issue in this comment. Consider revising "Temporarily commented will be worked on later" to something like "Temporarily commented out; will be worked on later" for improved clarity.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 10% vs. threshold = 50% This is a purely stylistic suggestion about the wording of a temporary comment. The existing comment, while not perfectly worded, is still understandable. Since this is temporary code that will be worked on later, perfecting the grammar of the comment adds little value. The rules specifically say not to make purely informative comments that don't require code changes. The comment does point out a legitimate grammatical issue. Clear communication in code comments can be important for maintainability. While clear communication is important, this is explicitly marked as temporary code that will be changed later. The minor grammatical improvement doesn't justify a PR comment. Delete the comment as it's a purely stylistic suggestion about temporary code that doesn't require any functional changes.

17. src/features/schemas/components/SchemaList.tsx:408

• Draft comment:
  Typo found in the comment text. "Commented temporarily will we worked on later" likely should be corrected to "Commented temporarily, will be worked on later".
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 10% vs. threshold = 50% While the comment is technically correct about the typo, it's just about a temporary comment that explains why some code is commented out. The commented code itself is marked as "temporarily commented will be worked on later" and will likely be removed or changed in the future. Fixing grammar in a temporary comment that will be removed anyway doesn't add value. The comment is factually correct - there is indeed a grammatical error. And generally, maintaining good grammar even in comments is a good practice. However, this is a temporary comment explaining temporarily commented code. The effort to fix grammar in a comment that will be removed soon doesn't justify the overhead of a PR comment and review cycle. Delete this comment as it focuses on grammar in a temporary comment that will likely be removed soon anyway. The effort to fix this doesn't provide enough value.

18. src/features/schemas/components/SchemaList.tsx:425

• Draft comment:
  There's an extraneous '/' after the closing tag. If this was intended to remove a block comment, please remove the '/' to correct this typographical error.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment looked like it was already resolved.

Workflow ID: wflow_cdu0cbMrQsZ8rKLT

^{You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.}

[ellipsis-dev]

Caution

Changes requested ❌

Reviewed 98a2c9b in 1 minute and 13 seconds. Click for details.

• Reviewed 13 lines of code in 1 files
• Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 1 draft comments. View those below.
• Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.

1. src/features/organization/bulkIssuance/components/BulkIssuance.tsx:216

• Draft comment:
  Typo: It appears there's an extra trailing space in the string literal 'bulk-issuance-process-completed '. Consider removing the trailing space to ensure the correct event name is used.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Marked as duplicate.

Workflow ID: wflow_TmurAn98pAPwydRN

^{You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.}

[ellipsis-dev]

Important

Looks good to me! 👍

Reviewed a600060 in 1 minute and 12 seconds. Click for details.

• Reviewed 13 lines of code in 1 files
• Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 2 draft comments. View those below.
• Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.

1. src/features/organization/bulkIssuance/components/BulkIssuance.tsx:239

• Draft comment:
  Extra trailing space in console.log string appears unnecessary. Consider removing it for consistency.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Confidence changes required: 0% <= threshold 50% None

2. src/features/organization/bulkIssuance/components/BulkIssuance.tsx:239

• Draft comment:
  Typo: There is an extra trailing space in the log message string ('error-in-bulk-issuance-process-initiated '). Consider removing it for consistency.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 10% vs. threshold = 50% This is an extremely minor formatting issue in a console.log message that's only used for debugging. Console.log messages are typically temporary debugging tools and their exact formatting is not important. The trailing space has no functional impact. This seems like the kind of nitpicky comment that adds noise without value. Maybe consistent formatting is important for this codebase? Maybe there are strict style guidelines around console.log messages? Even if there are style guidelines, this is still too minor to warrant a comment. Console.log messages are for debugging only and their exact formatting doesn't matter. The comment violates the rule about not making obvious/unimportant comments. Delete this comment. It points out an extremely minor formatting issue in a debug log message that has no functional impact. This kind of nitpicky comment adds noise without value.

Workflow ID: wflow_utQnQ8HWwJnFWizo

^{You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.}