1843: Missing application labels #1855
Conversation
…ByMinisterPresidentEntitlement, consider parents for resolving keys for attachments, fix wrong label
f1sh1918
requested review from
steffenkleinle,
ztefanie and
seluianova
as code owners
| "juleicaNumber": "Kartennummer", | ||
| "juleicaExpiration": "Karte gültig bis", | ||
| "copyOfJuleicaFront": "Kopie der Karte (1)", | ||
| "copyOfJuleicaBack": "Kopie der Karte (2)", | ||
| "blueCardWorkAtOrganizationsEntitlement": "Ich engagiere mich ehrenamtlich seit mindestens zwei Jahren freiwillig mindestens fünf Stunden pro Woche oder bei Projektarbeiten mindestens 250 Stunden jährlich", | ||
| "goldenCardWorkAtOrganizationsEntitlement": "Ich bin seit mindestens 25 Jahren mindestens 5 Stunden pro Woche oder 250 Stunden pro Jahr bei einem Verein oder einer Organisation ehrenamtlich tätig", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I am also unsure why these strings are duplicated (once here and once in goldenCardEntitlementType.WorkAtOrganizations)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The problem is that the keys were stored like that in the database (example)
I believe this happens in the GoldenCardEntitlement.kt
If i change this structure i would also have to replace the keys in jsonField in the production database via migration or sth :/
{
"name": "goldenCardHonoredByMinisterPresidentEntitlement",
"type": "Array",
"value": [
{
"name": "certificate",
"type": "Attachment",
"value": {
"fileIndex": 0
}
}
]
},
i don't see any other way now to resolve the other structure.
If you have any idea let me known @michael-markl
But i May delete some duplicates if I change the keys in the form that write it in the form state
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Update: Okay i adjusted the keys that were used for the state (these keys will also be stored like that in the database, so we can properly resolve it again)
Removed the duplicates in the de.json
…keys as they were stored in the database
f1sh1918
force-pushed
the
1843-missing-application-labels
branch
from
fa961e2 to
55f5d48
Compare
|
@seluianova and @bahaaTuffaha this pr needs really proper testing, since we will have bad issues with wrong i18n keys in the database, if there is a mess. If you have any questions don't hesitate to ask me |
| ].includes(jsonField.name) | ||
| ? `${jsonField.name}.title` | ||
| : jsonField.name | ||
|
|
||
| const children = jsonField.value.map((jsonFieldIt, index: number) => ( | ||
| <JsonFieldView | ||
| jsonField={jsonFieldIt} | ||
| parentName={['organizationContact', 'organization'].includes(jsonField.name) ? jsonField.name : undefined} | ||
| parentName={ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
since these keys are objects we need also the parent to resolve them properly
Short description
Some application labels were not resolved properly
Proposed changes
goldenCardHonoredByMinisterPresidentEntitlement,Side effects
Testing
de.json, there were some keys likecertificateresolved wrong because the parents wasn't usedResolved issues
Fixes: #1843
Fixes: #1852