Validation error errors | ResourcePanel & DetailsTabView

[nucleogenesis]

Description

Some validation fixes:

• The ResourcePanel (right sidebar) license_description was showing because logic didn't account for whether the selected license was is_custom or not.
• Some fields had a ! they didn't need in their validation logic.
• Add check for isExercise on a question-related validator
• Use isNodeComplete rather than node.complete in the ContentNodeValidator component.

Issue Addressed (if applicable)

Fixes#2314
Fixes#2334

Steps to Test

ResourcePanel:

Edit a node so that things are invalid and save the node, go back to the node listing page and select the node again to see that the proper error messages are shown and that there is a red (!) on the item. Try all validated fields copyright_holderlicense and - when you select the "Special Permissions" license, the license_description field and then finally the "Visible to" field.

Details Tab View (Editing the Node Page):

I really couldn't replicate here (surprisingly because I definitely did during or before the bug bash). If you can give a reliable way to break validations here please let me know and I'll address them in this PR quickly.

Does this introduce any tech-debt items?

@MisRob the move to "isNodeComplete" in ContentNodeValidator was done because a node where node.complete ==> false but isNodeComplete(node) ==> true. I'm thinking that some part of #2281 may not work as expected in this regard? I'd be happy to address this issue in a follow up PR.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #2328 into develop will decrease coverage by 0.04%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@ Coverage Diff @@## develop #2328 +/- ##
===========================================
- Coverage 82.65% 82.61% -0.05% 
===========================================
Files 298 298 Lines 14708 14717 +9 ===========================================
+ Hits 12157 12158 +1 - Misses 2551 2559 +8 

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
contentcuration/contentcuration/views/base.py	54.00% <0.00%> (-4.06%)	⬇️
...ontentcuration/contentcuration/utils/csv_writer.py	47.41% <0.00%> (+3.31%)	⬆️

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 6c422be...57a8287. Read the comment docs.

[MisRob]

@nucleogenesis Thank you. I've left one more note.

Also, it seems that we can't close all linked issues. I am going to do some validation updates soon, as mentioned in our conversations here. Before closing this PR, could you please update issues to reflect what you've found out or close issues that can't be replicated?

[micahscopes]

I just tested and it seems to be working!

I didn't test thoroughly enough!

This issue has been addressed

[micahscopes]

It's working now 🥳

Thanks @jayoshih for catching this!

[nucleogenesis]

Description

Some validation fixes:

• The ResourcePanel (right sidebar) license_description was showing because logic didn't account for whether the selected license was is_custom or not.
• Some fields had a ! they didn't need in their validation logic.
• Add check for isExercise on a question-related validator
• Use isNodeComplete rather than node.complete in the ContentNodeValidator component.

Issue Addressed (if applicable)

Fixes#2314
Fixes#2334

Steps to Test

ResourcePanel:

Edit a node so that things are invalid and save the node, go back to the node listing page and select the node again to see that the proper error messages are shown and that there is a red (!) on the item. Try all validated fields copyright_holderlicense and - when you select the "Special Permissions" license, the license_description field and then finally the "Visible to" field.

Details Tab View (Editing the Node Page):

I really couldn't replicate here (surprisingly because I definitely did during or before the bug bash). If you can give a reliable way to break validations here please let me know and I'll address them in this PR quickly.

Does this introduce any tech-debt items?

@MisRob the move to "isNodeComplete" in ContentNodeValidator was done because a node where node.complete ==> false but isNodeComplete(node) ==> true. I'm thinking that some part of #2281 may not work as expected in this regard? I'd be happy to address this issue in a follow up PR.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #2328 into develop will decrease coverage by 0.04%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@ Coverage Diff @@## develop #2328 +/- ##
===========================================
- Coverage 82.65% 82.61% -0.05% 
===========================================
Files 298 298 Lines 14708 14717 +9 ===========================================
+ Hits 12157 12158 +1 - Misses 2551 2559 +8 

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
contentcuration/contentcuration/views/base.py	54.00% <0.00%> (-4.06%)	⬇️
...ontentcuration/contentcuration/utils/csv_writer.py	47.41% <0.00%> (+3.31%)	⬆️

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 6c422be...57a8287. Read the comment docs.

[MisRob]

@nucleogenesis Thank you. I've left one more note.

Also, it seems that we can't close all linked issues. I am going to do some validation updates soon, as mentioned in our conversations here. Before closing this PR, could you please update issues to reflect what you've found out or close issues that can't be replicated?

[micahscopes]

I just tested and it seems to be working!

I didn't test thoroughly enough!

This issue has been addressed

[micahscopes]

It's working now 🥳

Thanks @jayoshih for catching this!

[nucleogenesis]

Description

Some validation fixes:

• The ResourcePanel (right sidebar) license_description was showing because logic didn't account for whether the selected license was is_custom or not.
• Some fields had a ! they didn't need in their validation logic.
• Add check for isExercise on a question-related validator
• Use isNodeComplete rather than node.complete in the ContentNodeValidator component.

Issue Addressed (if applicable)

Fixes#2314
Fixes#2334

Steps to Test

ResourcePanel:

Edit a node so that things are invalid and save the node, go back to the node listing page and select the node again to see that the proper error messages are shown and that there is a red (!) on the item. Try all validated fields copyright_holderlicense and - when you select the "Special Permissions" license, the license_description field and then finally the "Visible to" field.

Details Tab View (Editing the Node Page):

I really couldn't replicate here (surprisingly because I definitely did during or before the bug bash). If you can give a reliable way to break validations here please let me know and I'll address them in this PR quickly.

Does this introduce any tech-debt items?

@MisRob the move to "isNodeComplete" in ContentNodeValidator was done because a node where node.complete ==> false but isNodeComplete(node) ==> true. I'm thinking that some part of #2281 may not work as expected in this regard? I'd be happy to address this issue in a follow up PR.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #2328 into develop will decrease coverage by 0.04%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@ Coverage Diff @@## develop #2328 +/- ##
===========================================
- Coverage 82.65% 82.61% -0.05% 
===========================================
Files 298 298 Lines 14708 14717 +9 ===========================================
+ Hits 12157 12158 +1 - Misses 2551 2559 +8 

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
contentcuration/contentcuration/views/base.py	54.00% <0.00%> (-4.06%)	⬇️
...ontentcuration/contentcuration/utils/csv_writer.py	47.41% <0.00%> (+3.31%)	⬆️

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 6c422be...57a8287. Read the comment docs.

[MisRob]

@nucleogenesis Thank you. I've left one more note.

Also, it seems that we can't close all linked issues. I am going to do some validation updates soon, as mentioned in our conversations here. Before closing this PR, could you please update issues to reflect what you've found out or close issues that can't be replicated?

[micahscopes]

I just tested and it seems to be working!

I didn't test thoroughly enough!

This issue has been addressed

[micahscopes]

It's working now 🥳

Thanks @jayoshih for catching this!

[nucleogenesis]

Description

Some validation fixes:

• The ResourcePanel (right sidebar) license_description was showing because logic didn't account for whether the selected license was is_custom or not.
• Some fields had a ! they didn't need in their validation logic.
• Add check for isExercise on a question-related validator
• Use isNodeComplete rather than node.complete in the ContentNodeValidator component.

Issue Addressed (if applicable)

Fixes#2314
Fixes#2334

Steps to Test

ResourcePanel:

Edit a node so that things are invalid and save the node, go back to the node listing page and select the node again to see that the proper error messages are shown and that there is a red (!) on the item. Try all validated fields copyright_holderlicense and - when you select the "Special Permissions" license, the license_description field and then finally the "Visible to" field.

Details Tab View (Editing the Node Page):

I really couldn't replicate here (surprisingly because I definitely did during or before the bug bash). If you can give a reliable way to break validations here please let me know and I'll address them in this PR quickly.

Does this introduce any tech-debt items?

@MisRob the move to "isNodeComplete" in ContentNodeValidator was done because a node where node.complete ==> false but isNodeComplete(node) ==> true. I'm thinking that some part of #2281 may not work as expected in this regard? I'd be happy to address this issue in a follow up PR.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #2328 into develop will decrease coverage by 0.04%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@ Coverage Diff @@## develop #2328 +/- ##
===========================================
- Coverage 82.65% 82.61% -0.05% 
===========================================
Files 298 298 Lines 14708 14717 +9 ===========================================
+ Hits 12157 12158 +1 - Misses 2551 2559 +8 

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
contentcuration/contentcuration/views/base.py	54.00% <0.00%> (-4.06%)	⬇️
...ontentcuration/contentcuration/utils/csv_writer.py	47.41% <0.00%> (+3.31%)	⬆️

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 6c422be...57a8287. Read the comment docs.

[MisRob]

@nucleogenesis Thank you. I've left one more note.

Also, it seems that we can't close all linked issues. I am going to do some validation updates soon, as mentioned in our conversations here. Before closing this PR, could you please update issues to reflect what you've found out or close issues that can't be replicated?

[micahscopes]

I just tested and it seems to be working!

I didn't test thoroughly enough!

This issue has been addressed

[micahscopes]

It's working now 🥳

Thanks @jayoshih for catching this!

[nucleogenesis]

Description

Some validation fixes:

• The ResourcePanel (right sidebar) license_description was showing because logic didn't account for whether the selected license was is_custom or not.
• Some fields had a ! they didn't need in their validation logic.
• Add check for isExercise on a question-related validator
• Use isNodeComplete rather than node.complete in the ContentNodeValidator component.

Issue Addressed (if applicable)

Fixes#2314
Fixes#2334

Steps to Test

ResourcePanel:

Edit a node so that things are invalid and save the node, go back to the node listing page and select the node again to see that the proper error messages are shown and that there is a red (!) on the item. Try all validated fields copyright_holderlicense and - when you select the "Special Permissions" license, the license_description field and then finally the "Visible to" field.

Details Tab View (Editing the Node Page):

I really couldn't replicate here (surprisingly because I definitely did during or before the bug bash). If you can give a reliable way to break validations here please let me know and I'll address them in this PR quickly.

Does this introduce any tech-debt items?

@MisRob the move to "isNodeComplete" in ContentNodeValidator was done because a node where node.complete ==> false but isNodeComplete(node) ==> true. I'm thinking that some part of #2281 may not work as expected in this regard? I'd be happy to address this issue in a follow up PR.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #2328 into develop will decrease coverage by 0.04%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@ Coverage Diff @@## develop #2328 +/- ##
===========================================
- Coverage 82.65% 82.61% -0.05% 
===========================================
Files 298 298 Lines 14708 14717 +9 ===========================================
+ Hits 12157 12158 +1 - Misses 2551 2559 +8 

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
contentcuration/contentcuration/views/base.py	54.00% <0.00%> (-4.06%)	⬇️
...ontentcuration/contentcuration/utils/csv_writer.py	47.41% <0.00%> (+3.31%)	⬆️

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 6c422be...57a8287. Read the comment docs.

[MisRob]

@nucleogenesis Thank you. I've left one more note.

Also, it seems that we can't close all linked issues. I am going to do some validation updates soon, as mentioned in our conversations here. Before closing this PR, could you please update issues to reflect what you've found out or close issues that can't be replicated?

[micahscopes]

I just tested and it seems to be working!

I didn't test thoroughly enough!

This issue has been addressed

[micahscopes]

It's working now 🥳

Thanks @jayoshih for catching this!

[nucleogenesis]

Description

Some validation fixes:

• The ResourcePanel (right sidebar) license_description was showing because logic didn't account for whether the selected license was is_custom or not.
• Some fields had a ! they didn't need in their validation logic.
• Add check for isExercise on a question-related validator
• Use isNodeComplete rather than node.complete in the ContentNodeValidator component.

Issue Addressed (if applicable)

Fixes#2314
Fixes#2334

Steps to Test

ResourcePanel:

Edit a node so that things are invalid and save the node, go back to the node listing page and select the node again to see that the proper error messages are shown and that there is a red (!) on the item. Try all validated fields copyright_holderlicense and - when you select the "Special Permissions" license, the license_description field and then finally the "Visible to" field.

Details Tab View (Editing the Node Page):

I really couldn't replicate here (surprisingly because I definitely did during or before the bug bash). If you can give a reliable way to break validations here please let me know and I'll address them in this PR quickly.

Does this introduce any tech-debt items?

@MisRob the move to "isNodeComplete" in ContentNodeValidator was done because a node where node.complete ==> false but isNodeComplete(node) ==> true. I'm thinking that some part of #2281 may not work as expected in this regard? I'd be happy to address this issue in a follow up PR.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #2328 into develop will decrease coverage by 0.04%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@ Coverage Diff @@## develop #2328 +/- ##
===========================================
- Coverage 82.65% 82.61% -0.05% 
===========================================
Files 298 298 Lines 14708 14717 +9 ===========================================
+ Hits 12157 12158 +1 - Misses 2551 2559 +8 

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
contentcuration/contentcuration/views/base.py	54.00% <0.00%> (-4.06%)	⬇️
...ontentcuration/contentcuration/utils/csv_writer.py	47.41% <0.00%> (+3.31%)	⬆️

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 6c422be...57a8287. Read the comment docs.

[MisRob]

@nucleogenesis Thank you. I've left one more note.

Also, it seems that we can't close all linked issues. I am going to do some validation updates soon, as mentioned in our conversations here. Before closing this PR, could you please update issues to reflect what you've found out or close issues that can't be replicated?

[micahscopes]

I just tested and it seems to be working!

I didn't test thoroughly enough!

This issue has been addressed

[micahscopes]

It's working now 🥳

Thanks @jayoshih for catching this!

[nucleogenesis]

Description

Some validation fixes:

• The ResourcePanel (right sidebar) license_description was showing because logic didn't account for whether the selected license was is_custom or not.
• Some fields had a ! they didn't need in their validation logic.
• Add check for isExercise on a question-related validator
• Use isNodeComplete rather than node.complete in the ContentNodeValidator component.

Issue Addressed (if applicable)

Fixes#2314
Fixes#2334

Steps to Test

ResourcePanel:

Edit a node so that things are invalid and save the node, go back to the node listing page and select the node again to see that the proper error messages are shown and that there is a red (!) on the item. Try all validated fields copyright_holderlicense and - when you select the "Special Permissions" license, the license_description field and then finally the "Visible to" field.

Details Tab View (Editing the Node Page):

I really couldn't replicate here (surprisingly because I definitely did during or before the bug bash). If you can give a reliable way to break validations here please let me know and I'll address them in this PR quickly.

Does this introduce any tech-debt items?

@MisRob the move to "isNodeComplete" in ContentNodeValidator was done because a node where node.complete ==> false but isNodeComplete(node) ==> true. I'm thinking that some part of #2281 may not work as expected in this regard? I'd be happy to address this issue in a follow up PR.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #2328 into develop will decrease coverage by 0.04%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@ Coverage Diff @@## develop #2328 +/- ##
===========================================
- Coverage 82.65% 82.61% -0.05% 
===========================================
Files 298 298 Lines 14708 14717 +9 ===========================================
+ Hits 12157 12158 +1 - Misses 2551 2559 +8 

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
contentcuration/contentcuration/views/base.py	54.00% <0.00%> (-4.06%)	⬇️
...ontentcuration/contentcuration/utils/csv_writer.py	47.41% <0.00%> (+3.31%)	⬆️

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 6c422be...57a8287. Read the comment docs.

[MisRob]

@nucleogenesis Thank you. I've left one more note.

Also, it seems that we can't close all linked issues. I am going to do some validation updates soon, as mentioned in our conversations here. Before closing this PR, could you please update issues to reflect what you've found out or close issues that can't be replicated?

[micahscopes]

I just tested and it seems to be working!

I didn't test thoroughly enough!

This issue has been addressed

[micahscopes]

It's working now 🥳

Thanks @jayoshih for catching this!

[nucleogenesis]

Description

Some validation fixes:

• The ResourcePanel (right sidebar) license_description was showing because logic didn't account for whether the selected license was is_custom or not.
• Some fields had a ! they didn't need in their validation logic.
• Add check for isExercise on a question-related validator
• Use isNodeComplete rather than node.complete in the ContentNodeValidator component.

Issue Addressed (if applicable)

Fixes#2314
Fixes#2334

Steps to Test

ResourcePanel:

Edit a node so that things are invalid and save the node, go back to the node listing page and select the node again to see that the proper error messages are shown and that there is a red (!) on the item. Try all validated fields copyright_holderlicense and - when you select the "Special Permissions" license, the license_description field and then finally the "Visible to" field.

Details Tab View (Editing the Node Page):

I really couldn't replicate here (surprisingly because I definitely did during or before the bug bash). If you can give a reliable way to break validations here please let me know and I'll address them in this PR quickly.

Does this introduce any tech-debt items?

@MisRob the move to "isNodeComplete" in ContentNodeValidator was done because a node where node.complete ==> false but isNodeComplete(node) ==> true. I'm thinking that some part of #2281 may not work as expected in this regard? I'd be happy to address this issue in a follow up PR.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #2328 into develop will decrease coverage by 0.04%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@ Coverage Diff @@## develop #2328 +/- ##
===========================================
- Coverage 82.65% 82.61% -0.05% 
===========================================
Files 298 298 Lines 14708 14717 +9 ===========================================
+ Hits 12157 12158 +1 - Misses 2551 2559 +8 

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
contentcuration/contentcuration/views/base.py	54.00% <0.00%> (-4.06%)	⬇️
...ontentcuration/contentcuration/utils/csv_writer.py	47.41% <0.00%> (+3.31%)	⬆️

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 6c422be...57a8287. Read the comment docs.

[MisRob]

@nucleogenesis Thank you. I've left one more note.

Also, it seems that we can't close all linked issues. I am going to do some validation updates soon, as mentioned in our conversations here. Before closing this PR, could you please update issues to reflect what you've found out or close issues that can't be replicated?

[micahscopes]

I just tested and it seems to be working!

I didn't test thoroughly enough!

This issue has been addressed

[micahscopes]

It's working now 🥳

Thanks @jayoshih for catching this!