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

feat(replay): viewed_by_me search alias #70535

Closed
wants to merge 15 commits into from
Closed

Conversation

aliu3ntry
Copy link
Member

@aliu3ntry aliu3ntry commented May 8, 2024

Follow up from #64924

On the backend, we query by viewed_by_id. Previously, we expose this in the search bar typeahead. But this doesn't really make sense since you need to be an admin to lookup user ids. So we'll use this for convenience - "have I seen/not seen this?"

@aliu3ntry aliu3ntry requested a review from a team as a code owner May 8, 2024 20:19
@github-actions github-actions bot added the Scope: Backend Automatically applied to PRs that change backend components label May 8, 2024
and search_filter.key.name in VIEWED_BY_ME_KEY_ALIASES
):
# "viewed_by_me" is not a valid query field.
# It's a convenience alias for users without the admin access to lookup ids.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

       # It's a convenience alias for users without the admin access to lookup ids.

isn't this all users? should we just remove this comment as no sentry users have admin access?

Copy link
Member Author

@aliu3ntry aliu3ntry May 8, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah, maybe
"It's a convenience alias for users, since only Sentry employees can lookup ids"
?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

why do we need to clarify this?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

(it seems to be a given)

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Other ppl on our team weren't clear about this when we built it, which is why we exposed viewed_by_id

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

right, but the comment implies that us going and looking up ids is a normal use case, but it is not -- i think thats where my confusion lies

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Oh, I see. I guess that can be misleading, I can remove it then

@aliu3ntry aliu3ntry marked this pull request as ready for review May 9, 2024 14:08
@aliu3ntry aliu3ntry requested review from a team, JoshFerge and ryan953 May 9, 2024 16:50
Copy link

codecov bot commented May 9, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 80.00%. Comparing base (1f61c87) to head (24655de).
Report is 38 commits behind head on master.

❗ Current head 24655de differs from pull request most recent head 6655c40. Consider uploading reports for the commit 6655c40 to get more accurate results

Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           master   #70535       +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage   63.16%   80.00%   +16.83%     
===========================================
  Files        6501     6505        +4     
  Lines      290600   290418      -182     
  Branches    50105    50064       -41     
===========================================
+ Hits       183554   232342    +48788     
+ Misses     106606    57710    -48896     
+ Partials      440      366       -74     
Files Coverage Δ
src/sentry/replays/usecases/query/__init__.py 97.29% <100.00%> (+26.08%) ⬆️

... and 2031 files with indirect coverage changes

@aliu3ntry aliu3ntry requested review from a team as code owners May 14, 2024 23:05
@github-actions github-actions bot added the Scope: Frontend Automatically applied to PRs that change frontend components label May 14, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

🚨 Warning: This pull request contains Frontend and Backend changes!

It's discouraged to make changes to Sentry's Frontend and Backend in a single pull request. The Frontend and Backend are not atomically deployed. If the changes are interdependent of each other, they must be separated into two pull requests and be made forward or backwards compatible, such that the Backend or Frontend can be safely deployed independently.

Have questions? Please ask in the #discuss-dev-infra channel.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Scope: Backend Automatically applied to PRs that change backend components Scope: Frontend Automatically applied to PRs that change frontend components
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants