Add tests for a particular use case of DH#6306
Merged
Merged
Conversation
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #6306 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 97.10% 97.10%
=======================================
Files 869 869
Lines 33147 33147
Branches 3048 3048
=======================================
Hits 32189 32189
Misses 646 646
Partials 312 312 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
Note that we expect this test to fail, because the expected behaviour from DH is really the wrong behaviour - we output all the variables all the time until #6012 is addressed. There are two issues happening here that get mixed up: * (not a real issue) the hidden variables are also mapped and present in the output, while that's not expected * there's a nested structure in the form UI that is expected to be kept when outputting to the Objects API, but layout components have no presence in the data. This has been explained and is the root cause. The JSON schema *does* expect the key to be present in the situation that DH is experiencing, however it should be in a nested level rather than the top level. I think we can handle that with clever component key naming. The change between 3.3 and 3.4 here is that the hidden fields are in the output, which traces back to the whole DISABLE_SENDING_HIDDEN_FIELDS flag for Objects API v1. This is a side-effect of the internal data structures rework for the performance rework and we cannot simply revert this. Furthermore, we had to do a hotfix in #6007 *because* the hidden fields were not sent. In 3.3 the hidden data would just not be present in each item, and therefore be omitted. Similarly, for skipped steps, the data didn't exist in the database and would be skipped. In 3.4, we build up the submission data differently and get back 'virtual' data for variables that don't exist in the database, which results in these keys being present in the output.
d469d31 to
3335a97
Compare
viktorvanwijk
approved these changes
May 26, 2026
Contributor
viktorvanwijk
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
After reading up on the problem in Taiga: makes sense :)
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
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.
Taiga DH 864
Changes
I've also checked out the wrong expectation situation and reverted the #6007 fix locally, which produced a passing test:
Checklist
Check off the items that are completed or not relevant.
Impact on features
Dockerfile/scripts
./binfolderCommit hygiene
Documentation
[skip: e2e]