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

do not check no for burial responsibility and plot expense responsibi… #16341

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Apr 15, 2024

Conversation

evansmith
Copy link
Contributor

@evansmith evansmith commented Apr 15, 2024

Note: Delete the description statements, complete each step. None are optional, but can be justified as to why they cannot be completed as written. Provide known gaps to testing that may raise the risk of merging to production.

Summary

  • YES va_burial_v2
  • This removes checking 'no' for burial expense responsibility and plot expense responsibility
  • Remove the intentional checking of 'no' that had been put in previously.
  • VA Benefits and Claims

Related issue(s)

- Link to ticket created in va.gov-team repo OR screenshot of Jira ticket if your team uses Jira

  • Link to previous change of the code/bug (if applicable)
  • Link to epic if not included in ticket

Testing done

  • New code is covered by unit tests
  • Previously if burial or plot were not checked off then 'no' would be checked on the pdf.
    -Fill out a claim leaving Burial and Plot blank when given the option to choose. PDF should not have them checked.

Screenshots

Note: Optional

What areas of the site does it impact?

Burials V2

Acceptance criteria

  • I fixed|updated|added unit tests and integration tests for each feature (if applicable).
  • No error nor warning in the console.
  • Events are being sent to the appropriate logging solution
  • Documentation has been updated (link to documentation)
  • No sensitive information (i.e. PII/credentials/internal URLs/etc.) is captured in logging, hardcoded, or specs
  • Feature/bug has a monitor built into Datadog or Grafana (if applicable)
  • If app impacted requires authentication, did you login to a local build and verify all authenticated routes work as expected
  • I added a screenshot of the developed feature

Requested Feedback

(OPTIONAL)What should the reviewers know in addition to the above. Is there anything specific you wish the reviewer to assist with. Do you have any concerns with this PR, why?

@va-vsp-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

Error: A file (or its parent directories) does not have a CODEOWNERS entry. Please update the .github/CODEOWNERS file and add the entry for the Offending file: spec/fixtures/pdf_fill/21P-530V2/merge_fields.json

tblackwe
tblackwe previously approved these changes Apr 15, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

@tblackwe tblackwe left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

same fix as transportation 👍

@va-vsp-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

Error: A file (or its parent directories) does not have a CODEOWNERS entry. Please update the .github/CODEOWNERS file and add the entry for the Offending file: spec/fixtures/pdf_fill/21P-530V2/merge_fields.json

@evansmith evansmith marked this pull request as ready for review April 15, 2024 18:02
@evansmith evansmith requested review from a team as code owners April 15, 2024 18:02
@va-vfs-bot va-vfs-bot temporarily deployed to ndbex-80639-blank-selections/main/main April 15, 2024 18:07 Inactive
@evansmith evansmith merged commit 29173f7 into master Apr 15, 2024
20 checks passed
@evansmith evansmith deleted the ndbex-80639-blank-selections branch April 15, 2024 23:26
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants