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

refactor: [M3-6910] - Replace instances in : Object Storage #11456

Conversation

hasyed-akamai
Copy link
Contributor

Description 📝

We want to get rid of our dependency on react-select for accessibility reasons and to consolidate our usage of third-party libraries.

Changes 🔄

  • Replaced Select with Autocomplete in Object Storage component.

Target release date 🗓️

N/A

How to test 🧪

Verification steps

(How to verify changes)

As an Author I have considered 🤔

Check all that apply

  • 👀 Doing a self review
  • ❔ Our contribution guidelines
  • 🤏 Splitting feature into small PRs
  • ➕ Adding a changeset
  • 🧪 Providing/Improving test coverage
  • 🔐 Removing all sensitive information from the code and PR description
  • 🚩 Using a feature flag to protect the release
  • 👣 Providing comprehensive reproduction steps
  • 📑 Providing or updating our documentation
  • 🕛 Scheduling a pair reviewing session
  • 📱 Providing mobile support
  • ♿ Providing accessibility support

@hasyed-akamai hasyed-akamai self-assigned this Dec 23, 2024
@hasyed-akamai hasyed-akamai added the Object Storage deals with Object Storage label Dec 23, 2024
@harsh-akamai harsh-akamai marked this pull request as ready for review January 6, 2025 08:58
@harsh-akamai harsh-akamai requested a review from a team as a code owner January 6, 2025 08:58
@harsh-akamai harsh-akamai requested review from hana-akamai and abailly-akamai and removed request for a team January 6, 2025 08:58
@hana-akamai hana-akamai added the Add'tl Approval Needed Waiting on another approval! label Jan 7, 2025
Copy link
Member

@bnussman-akamai bnussman-akamai left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

There are some unnecessary vi.mocks that we can remove.

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jan 7, 2025

Coverage Report:
Base Coverage: 86.95%
Current Coverage: 86.95%

@linode-gh-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

Cloud Manager UI test results

🎉 469 passing tests on test run #4 ↗︎

❌ Failing✅ Passing↪️ Skipped🕐 Duration
0 Failing469 Passing2 Skipped95m 58s

@hasyed-akamai hasyed-akamai merged commit 2562a2f into linode:develop Jan 7, 2025
23 checks passed
Copy link

cypress bot commented Jan 7, 2025

Cloud Manager E2E    Run #7046

Run Properties:  status check failed Failed #7046  •  git commit 2562a2ff08: refactor: [M3-6910] - Replace instances in : Object Storage (#11456)
Project Cloud Manager E2E
Branch Review develop
Run status status check failed Failed #7046
Run duration 28m 58s
Commit git commit 2562a2ff08: refactor: [M3-6910] - Replace instances in : Object Storage (#11456)
Committer hasyed-akamai
View all properties for this run ↗︎

Test results
Tests that failed  Failures 1
Tests that were flaky  Flaky 0
Tests that did not run due to a developer annotating a test with .skip  Pending 2
Tests that did not run due to a failure in a mocha hook  Skipped 0
Tests that passed  Passing 477
View all changes introduced in this branch ↗︎

Tests for review

Failed  cypress/e2e/core/linodes/clone-linode.spec.ts • 1 failed test

View Output Video

Test Artifacts
clone linode > can clone a Linode from Linode details page Screenshots Video

dmcintyr-akamai pushed a commit to dmcintyr-akamai/manager that referenced this pull request Jan 9, 2025
…1456)

* refactor: [M3-6910] - Replace instances in : Object Storage

* Added changeset: Replace Select with Autocomplete component in Object Storage

* Remove unnecessary `vi.mocks`
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Add'tl Approval Needed Waiting on another approval! Object Storage deals with Object Storage Ready for Review
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants