feat: display restricted runs on course about page #1220
Conversation
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #1220 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 88.41% 88.43% +0.01%
==========================================
Files 399 399
Lines 8502 8548 +46
Branches 2088 2102 +14
==========================================
+ Hits 7517 7559 +42
- Misses 942 946 +4
Partials 43 43 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚨 Try these New Features:
|
pwnage101
force-pushed
the
pwnage101/ENT-9410
branch
from
6ac97cf
to
af68ad1
Compare
| { | ||
| isMarketable: true, | ||
| availability: 'Current', | ||
| enrollmentStart: dayjs().add(-10, 'day').toISOString(), | ||
| enrollmentEnd: dayjs().add(15, 'day').toISOString(), | ||
| key: 'course-v1:edX+DemoX+2T2020restricted.b', | ||
| isEnrollable: true, | ||
| restrictionType: ENTERPRISE_RESTRICTION_TYPE, | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
[curious] Is it worth throwing in a test case where a restricted run is isMarketable false? Would that every happen (or be surfaced)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh, so the intention now from Phoenix team is that isMarketable can be respected at face value. We should never allow visibility of restricted runs that have isMarketable = false. That is already consistent with all of our current assumptions and tests, so I didn't think it needed a specific test case.
| const courseRunsMatrix = { | ||
| available: { | ||
| assigned: availableCourseRuns.map(r => ({ ...r, key: `${r.key}assigned` })), | ||
| unassigned: availableCourseRuns.map(r => ({ ...r, key: `${r.key}unassigned` })), | ||
| }, | ||
| unavailable: { | ||
| assigned: unavailableCourseRuns.map(r => ({ ...r, key: `${r.key}assigned` })), | ||
| unassigned: unavailableCourseRuns.map(r => ({ ...r, key: `${r.key}unassigned` })), | ||
| }, | ||
| }; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
[nit/curious] I think this is a great idea to defined a set of course runs which are considered assigned and unassigned, but I am wondering if we should be dependent on the mocked value for redeemablePolicies to determine if a specific run is assigned or unassigned.
| const assignedCourseRuns = [ | ||
| ...courseRunsMatrix.available.assigned, | ||
| ...courseRunsMatrix.unavailable.assigned, | ||
| ]; | ||
| const availableAndAssignedCourseRuns = [ | ||
| ...courseRunsMatrix.available.assigned, | ||
| ]; | ||
| const allCourseRuns = [ | ||
| ...courseRunsMatrix.available.assigned, | ||
| ...courseRunsMatrix.available.unassigned, | ||
| ...courseRunsMatrix.unavailable.assigned, | ||
| ...courseRunsMatrix.unavailable.unassigned, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
[nit] Migrating this to the top of the file for possible reuse
ENT-9410