BDMS 55: group coverage & other updates#98
Merged
Conversation
jacob-a-brown
requested review from
chasetmartin,
jirhiker and
ksmuczynski
and removed request for
chasetmartin,
jirhiker and
ksmuczynski
Member
|
can we avoid sequential merges in the future. Its hard to do the review because its a mix of changes from this PR and PR #97. |
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
|
jirhiker
approved these changes
Aug 25, 2025
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Why
This PR addresses the following problem / context:
grouprouter should be fully covered with GET, GET by ID, POST, PATCH, and DELETE endpointsHow
Implementation summary - the following was changed / added / removed:
/group/{group_id}endpointValidateGroupto ensure theproject_areaWKT is aMULTIPOLYGONgroup,sensor,sample, andlocationrouterssensor,sample, andlocationrouters to usesession_dependencyper standard that was established after those routers were establishedNotes
Any special considerations, workarounds, or follow-up work to note?