WEB: Implement accout level secrets #331
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
nxtcoder19
requested review from
karthik1729 and
abdheshnayak
as code owners
Reviewer's Guide by SourceryThis PR implements account-level secrets functionality by adding new GraphQL queries and mutations for secret variables management, along with corresponding UI components for creating, viewing, editing and deleting secret variables. The implementation includes a dedicated secrets page in account settings and detailed secret variable management views. Class diagram for secret variable managementclassDiagram
class SecretVariable {
+String id
+String accountName
+User createdBy
+DateTime creationTime
+String displayName
+User lastUpdatedBy
+Boolean markedForDeletion
+String name
+String recordVersion
+Map stringData
+DateTime updateTime
}
class User {
+String userEmail
+String userId
+String userName
}
SecretVariable o-- User: createdBy
SecretVariable o-- User: lastUpdatedBy
class SecretVariableQueries {
+listSecretVariables(pq: CursorPaginationIn, search: SearchSecretVariables)
+createSecretVariable(secretVariable: SecretVariableIn)
+getSecretVariable(name: String)
+updateSecretVariable(secretVariable: SecretVariableIn)
+deleteSecretVariable(name: String)
}
SecretVariableQueries --> SecretVariable: manages
File-Level Changes
Tips and commandsInteracting with Sourcery
Customizing Your ExperienceAccess your dashboard to:
Getting Help
|
![sourcery-ai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/48477?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hey @nxtcoder19 - I've reviewed your changes and they look great!
Here's what I looked at during the review
- 🟢 General issues: all looks good
- 🟢 Security: all looks good
- 🟢 Testing: all looks good
- 🟡 Complexity: 1 issue found
- 🟢 Documentation: all looks good
Help me be more useful! Please click 👍 or 👎 on each comment and I'll use the feedback to improve your reviews.
| const [showHandleConfig, setShowHandleConfig] = | ||
| useState<IShowDialog<IModifiedItem>>(null); | ||
|
|
||
| const [originalItems, setOriginalItems] = useState<IConfigOrSecretData>({}); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
issue (complexity): Consider consolidating secret entry state management into a dedicated custom hook
The current implementation uses parallel state tracking that makes updates and change detection unnecessarily complex. Consider extracting this logic into a custom hook that provides a cleaner interface:
interface SecretEntry {
value: string;
status: 'unchanged' | 'modified' | 'added' | 'deleted';
}
function useSecretEntries(initialData: Record<string, string>) {
const [entries, setEntries] = useState<Record<string, SecretEntry>>(() =>
Object.entries(initialData).reduce((acc, [key, value]) => ({
...acc,
[key]: { value, status: 'unchanged' }
}), {})
);
const addEntry = (key: string, value: string) =>
setEntries(prev => ({...prev, [key]: { value, status: 'added' }}));
const updateEntry = (key: string, value: string) =>
setEntries(prev => ({
...prev,
[key]: { value, status: prev[key].status === 'added' ? 'added' : 'modified' }
}));
const deleteEntry = (key: string) =>
setEntries(prev => {
if (prev[key].status === 'added') {
const { [key]: _, ...rest } = prev;
return rest;
}
return { ...prev, [key]: { ...prev[key], status: 'deleted' }};
});
const hasChanges = () => Object.values(entries).some(e => e.status !== 'unchanged');
const getModifiedData = () =>
Object.entries(entries)
.filter(([_, e]) => e.status !== 'deleted')
.reduce((acc, [k, e]) => ({...acc, [k]: e.value}), {});
return { entries, addEntry, updateEntry, deleteEntry, hasChanges, getModifiedData };
}This simplifies the component by:
- Consolidating state management into a single source of truth
- Providing clear, intention-revealing methods for state updates
- Eliminating complex nested state transformations
- Making change tracking more explicit
The component can then focus on rendering and user interaction rather than state manipulation logic.
Comment on lines
294
to
299
| if (isUpdate) | ||
| return getManagedTemplate({ | ||
| templates, | ||
| apiVersion: props.data.spec?.msvcSpec.serviceTemplate.apiVersion || '', | ||
| kind: props.data.spec?.msvcSpec.serviceTemplate.kind || '', | ||
| apiVersion: props.data.spec?.msvcSpec.serviceTemplate?.apiVersion || '', | ||
| kind: props.data.spec?.msvcSpec.serviceTemplate?.kind || '', | ||
| }); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
suggestion (code-quality): Use block braces for ifs, whiles, etc. (use-braces)
Suggested change
| if (isUpdate) | |
| return getManagedTemplate({ | |
| templates, | |
| apiVersion: props.data.spec?.msvcSpec.serviceTemplate.apiVersion || '', | |
| kind: props.data.spec?.msvcSpec.serviceTemplate.kind || '', | |
| apiVersion: props.data.spec?.msvcSpec.serviceTemplate?.apiVersion || '', | |
| kind: props.data.spec?.msvcSpec.serviceTemplate?.kind || '', | |
| }); | |
| if (isUpdate) { | |
| return getManagedTemplate({ | |
| templates, | |
| apiVersion: props.data.spec?.msvcSpec.serviceTemplate?.apiVersion || '', | |
| kind: props.data.spec?.msvcSpec.serviceTemplate?.kind || '', | |
| }); | |
| } | |
Explanation
It is recommended to always use braces and create explicit statement blocks.Using the allowed syntax to just write a single statement can lead to very confusing
situations, especially where subsequently a developer might add another statement
while forgetting to add the braces (meaning that this wouldn't be included in the condition).
| onClick(i); | ||
| setSelected(id); | ||
| }, | ||
| pressed: !linkComponent ? selected === id : false, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
suggestion (code-quality): Invert ternary operator to remove negation (invert-ternary)
Suggested change
| pressed: !linkComponent ? selected === id : false, | |
| pressed: linkComponent ? false : selected === id, |
Explanation
Negated conditions are more difficult to read than positive ones, so it is bestto avoid them where we can. By inverting the ternary condition and swapping the
expressions we can simplify the code.
Comment on lines
+330
to
+332
| message: showSecret.data?.value.newvalue | ||
| ? showSecret.data?.value.newvalue | ||
| : showSecret.data?.value.value, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
suggestion (code-quality): Avoid unneeded ternary statements (simplify-ternary)
Suggested change
| message: showSecret.data?.value.newvalue | |
| ? showSecret.data?.value.newvalue | |
| : showSecret.data?.value.value, | |
| message: showSecret.data?.value.newvalue || showSecret.data?.value.value, | |
Explanation
It is possible to simplify certain ternary statements into either use of an|| or !.This makes the code easier to read, since there is no conditional logic.
| } | ||
| return { | ||
| ...acc, | ||
| [key]: val.newvalue ? val.newvalue : val.value, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
suggestion (code-quality): Avoid unneeded ternary statements (simplify-ternary)
Suggested change
| [key]: val.newvalue ? val.newvalue : val.value, | |
| [key]: val.newvalue || val.value, |
Explanation
It is possible to simplify certain ternary statements into either use of an|| or !.This makes the code easier to read, since there is no conditional logic.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Resloves #330
Summary by Sourcery
Implement account-level secret management by adding GraphQL queries and mutations for secret variables. Refactor router queries for better readability and enhance managed service settings with safer property access.
New Features:
Enhancements: