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

fix: update logic for default true configs in Optimizely FS and engage #3284

Closed

Conversation

yashasvibajpai
Copy link
Contributor

What are the changes introduced in this PR?

In some of the integrations, it is incorrectly done for the boolean fields.

"enrich_decisions": .destination.Config.enrichDecisions || true

The above logic is in place to ensure that we use a default value true if the field's value is not defined. However, it'll still fall back to the default value even if the field's actual value is false due to the || true condition.

So, even if the user toggles the field to off in the UI, the integration will always treat is on. Essentially, the field's value is hardcoded.

What is the related Linear task?

Resolves INT-1806

Please explain the objectives of your changes below

Put down any required details on the broader aspect of your changes. If there are any dependent changes, mandatorily mention them here

Any changes to existing capabilities/behaviour, mention the reason & what are the changes ?

N/A

Any new dependencies introduced with this change?

N/A

Any new generic utility introduced or modified. Please explain the changes.

N/A

Any technical or performance related pointers to consider with the change?

N/A

@coderabbitai review


Developer checklist

  • My code follows the style guidelines of this project

  • No breaking changes are being introduced.

  • All related docs linked with the PR?

  • All changes manually tested?

  • Any documentation changes needed with this change?

  • Is the PR limited to 10 file changes?

  • Is the PR limited to one linear task?

  • Are relevant unit and component test-cases added?

Reviewer checklist

  • Is the type of change in the PR title appropriate as per the changes?

  • Verified that there are no credentials or confidential data exposed with the changes.

@yashasvibajpai yashasvibajpai self-assigned this Apr 17, 2024
@yashasvibajpai yashasvibajpai requested a review from a team as a code owner April 17, 2024 03:49
@devops-github-rudderstack
Copy link
Contributor

Copy link

Copy link

codecov bot commented Apr 17, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 87.83%. Comparing base (218f08c) to head (5e62222).
Report is 90 commits behind head on develop.

Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop    #3284      +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage    87.78%   87.83%   +0.05%     
===========================================
  Files          556      556              
  Lines        29832    29955     +123     
  Branches      7110     7154      +44     
===========================================
+ Hits         26188    26312     +124     
- Misses        3308     3310       +2     
+ Partials       336      333       -3     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@devops-github-rudderstack
Copy link
Contributor

This PR is considered to be stale. It has been open for 20 days with no further activity thus it is going to be closed in 7 days. To avoid such a case please consider removing the stale label manually or add a comment to the PR.

@devops-github-rudderstack devops-github-rudderstack deleted the fix.default.logic.for.true.configs.cloud.dest branch July 18, 2024 01:28
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants