Improve submission change displays#125
Merged
Merged
Conversation
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughReplaces raw JSON string rendering of submission changes with structured view models. New structs in ChangesStructured Submission Change Views
Estimated code review effort🎯 4 (Complex) | ⏱️ ~60 minutes Possibly related PRs
Poem
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4 | ❌ 1❌ Failed checks (1 warning)
✅ Passed checks (4 passed)
✨ Finishing Touches📝 Generate docstrings
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
whatever-industries
force-pushed
the
whatever-industries
branch
from
8341c20 to
1e76124
Compare
whatever-industries
changed the title
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
templates/queue_detail.html (1)
26-110: 📐 Maintainability & Code Quality | 🔵 Trivial | ⚡ Quick winConsider extracting the duplicated
change_viewsrendering into a shared Askama partial.This block (lines 26-110) is duplicated almost verbatim in
templates/disc_edit.html(lines 65-148). Since both templates expose achange_viewsfield, you can move the loop body into a partial (e.g.templates/_submission_change_views.html) and{% include %}it in both, eliminating the drift risk across two large blocks.🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate. In `@templates/queue_detail.html` around lines 26 - 110, The `change_views` rendering is duplicated between `queue_detail.html` and `disc_edit.html`, so move the full loop body into a shared Askama partial such as a submission change views template and include it from both places. Keep the partial aligned with the existing `change_views`, `view`, `section`, and `row` rendering structure so both templates reuse the same markup and any future changes happen in one place.
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
Inline comments:
In `@src/routes/queue.rs`:
- Around line 214-359: The new change-rendering helpers in queue.rs are
formatting raw JSON values, so lookup-backed fields like system_code,
media_type, regions, and languages will show codes instead of human-readable
labels. Update the helper flow around friendly_json_value, change_scalar_row,
change_multiline_row, and change_set_row to apply the same reference-data
formatting used by build_review_diff_context() via review_named_value,
display_region, and display_language before building change_views/change_details
rows. Keep the raw JSON parsing, but thread the display conversion through these
helpers so the new UI preserves human-readable output.
- Around line 749-763: The multiline detection in push_labeled_change_detail is
too narrow because it only checks for newline characters, so review-sidecar
fields like contents, cuesheet, and dat may render inline even though they
should be multiline. Update the is_multiline decision to also consider field
semantics in this function, using the field identifier plus the existing
current_value/previous_value checks, so the known multiline fields always get
multiline presentation regardless of whether the normalized text contains a
newline.
---
Nitpick comments:
In `@templates/queue_detail.html`:
- Around line 26-110: The `change_views` rendering is duplicated between
`queue_detail.html` and `disc_edit.html`, so move the full loop body into a
shared Askama partial such as a submission change views template and include it
from both places. Keep the partial aligned with the existing `change_views`,
`view`, `section`, and `row` rendering structure so both templates reuse the
same markup and any future changes happen in one place.
🪄 Autofix (Beta)
Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:
- Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
- Create a new PR with the fixes
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: defaults
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
Run ID: ced54a36-e20a-44b7-90f4-49dc5b6ab05a
📒 Files selected for processing (8)
src/db/models.rssrc/routes/disc_edit.rssrc/routes/queue.rssrc/services/queue_service.rsstatic/css/app.csstemplates/disc_edit.htmltemplates/queue.htmltemplates/queue_detail.html
Comment on lines
+214
to
+359
| fn display_change_value(value: &serde_json::Value) -> String { | ||
| review_annotation_value(value) | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| fn friendly_json_value(value: &serde_json::Value) -> String { | ||
| match value { | ||
| serde_json::Value::Null => String::new(), | ||
| serde_json::Value::String(s) => s.clone(), | ||
| serde_json::Value::Number(n) => n.to_string(), | ||
| serde_json::Value::Bool(b) => b.to_string(), | ||
| serde_json::Value::Array(values) => values | ||
| .iter() | ||
| .map(friendly_json_value) | ||
| .filter(|s| !s.trim().is_empty()) | ||
| .collect::<Vec<_>>() | ||
| .join(", "), | ||
| serde_json::Value::Object(map) => { | ||
| if let (Some(start), Some(end)) = (map.get("start"), map.get("end")) { | ||
| return format!( | ||
| "{}-{}", | ||
| friendly_json_value(start), | ||
| friendly_json_value(end) | ||
| ); | ||
| } | ||
| map.iter() | ||
| .map(|(key, value)| format!("{key}: {}", friendly_json_value(value))) | ||
| .collect::<Vec<_>>() | ||
| .join("; ") | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| fn empty_display_value(value: String) -> String { | ||
| if value.trim().is_empty() { | ||
| "(empty)".to_string() | ||
| } else { | ||
| value | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| fn status_for_action(action: &str) -> &'static str { | ||
| match action { | ||
| "Added" => "item-added", | ||
| "Removed" => "item-removed", | ||
| "Modified" => "item-changed", | ||
| _ => "", | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| fn change_operation_parts( | ||
| change: &serde_json::Value, | ||
| ) -> Option<( | ||
| &'static str, | ||
| Option<&serde_json::Value>, | ||
| Option<&serde_json::Value>, | ||
| )> { | ||
| if let Some(modify) = change.get("modify") { | ||
| return Some(("Modified", modify.get("old"), modify.get("new"))); | ||
| } | ||
| if let Some(add) = change.get("add") { | ||
| return Some(("Added", None, add.get("new").or(Some(add)))); | ||
| } | ||
| if let Some(remove) = change.get("remove") { | ||
| return Some(("Removed", remove.get("old").or(Some(remove)), None)); | ||
| } | ||
| match (change.get("old"), change.get("new")) { | ||
| (Some(old), Some(new)) => Some(("Modified", Some(old), Some(new))), | ||
| (None, Some(new)) => Some(("Added", None, Some(new))), | ||
| (Some(old), None) => Some(("Removed", Some(old), None)), | ||
| (None, None) => None, | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| fn change_scalar_row(field: &str, change: &serde_json::Value) -> Option<SubmissionChangeScalarRow> { | ||
| let (action, old, new) = change_operation_parts(change)?; | ||
| Some(SubmissionChangeScalarRow { | ||
| field: change_field_label(field), | ||
| action: action.to_string(), | ||
| previous_value: old | ||
| .map(friendly_json_value) | ||
| .map(empty_display_value) | ||
| .unwrap_or_default(), | ||
| current_value: new | ||
| .map(friendly_json_value) | ||
| .map(empty_display_value) | ||
| .unwrap_or_default(), | ||
| status_class: status_for_action(action).to_string(), | ||
| }) | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| fn change_multiline_row( | ||
| field: &str, | ||
| change: &serde_json::Value, | ||
| ) -> Option<SubmissionChangeMultilineRow> { | ||
| let (action, old, new) = change_operation_parts(change)?; | ||
| Some(SubmissionChangeMultilineRow { | ||
| field: change_field_label(field), | ||
| action: action.to_string(), | ||
| previous_value: old.map(friendly_json_value).unwrap_or_default(), | ||
| current_value: new.map(friendly_json_value).unwrap_or_default(), | ||
| status_class: status_for_action(action).to_string(), | ||
| }) | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| fn string_vec_values(value: Option<&serde_json::Value>) -> Vec<String> { | ||
| match value { | ||
| Some(serde_json::Value::Array(values)) => values | ||
| .iter() | ||
| .map(friendly_json_value) | ||
| .filter(|s| !s.trim().is_empty()) | ||
| .collect(), | ||
| Some(value) => { | ||
| let display = friendly_json_value(value); | ||
| if display.trim().is_empty() { | ||
| Vec::new() | ||
| } else { | ||
| vec![display] | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| None => Vec::new(), | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| fn change_set_row(field: &str, change: &serde_json::Value) -> Option<SubmissionChangeSetRow> { | ||
| let added = string_vec_values( | ||
| change | ||
| .get("add") | ||
| .and_then(|value| value.get("new")) | ||
| .or_else(|| change.get("add")), | ||
| ); | ||
| let removed = string_vec_values( | ||
| change | ||
| .get("remove") | ||
| .and_then(|value| value.get("old")) | ||
| .or_else(|| change.get("remove")), | ||
| ); | ||
| if added.is_empty() && removed.is_empty() { | ||
| None | ||
| } else { | ||
| Some(SubmissionChangeSetRow { | ||
| field: change_field_label(field), | ||
| added, | ||
| removed, | ||
| }) | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🎯 Functional Correctness | 🟠 Major | 🏗️ Heavy lift
Humanize lookup-backed fields before using these helpers for the new change UI.
These paths stringify stored JSON directly, so system_code, media_type, regions, and languages will render as raw codes in both change_views and change_details. build_review_diff_context() already resolves those fields through review_named_value, display_region, and display_language, so this regresses the “human-readable” presentation the PR is introducing. Thread the same reference-data formatting through these helpers instead of formatting from raw JSON alone.
Also applies to: 777-849
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
In `@src/routes/queue.rs` around lines 214 - 359, The new change-rendering helpers
in queue.rs are formatting raw JSON values, so lookup-backed fields like
system_code, media_type, regions, and languages will show codes instead of
human-readable labels. Update the helper flow around friendly_json_value,
change_scalar_row, change_multiline_row, and change_set_row to apply the same
reference-data formatting used by build_review_diff_context() via
review_named_value, display_region, and display_language before building
change_views/change_details rows. Keep the raw JSON parsing, but thread the
display conversion through these helpers so the new UI preserves human-readable
output.
Comment on lines
+749
to
+763
| fn push_labeled_change_detail( | ||
| details: &mut Vec<SubmissionChangeDetail>, | ||
| field: &str, | ||
| current_value: String, | ||
| previous_value: String, | ||
| current_label: String, | ||
| previous_label: String, | ||
| current_kind: String, | ||
| previous_kind: String, | ||
| ) { | ||
| if current_value.trim().is_empty() && previous_value.trim().is_empty() { | ||
| return; | ||
| } | ||
| let is_multiline = current_value.contains('\n') || previous_value.contains('\n'); | ||
| details.push(SubmissionChangeDetail { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🎯 Functional Correctness | 🟡 Minor | ⚡ Quick win
Base is_multiline on field semantics, not just newline detection.
contents, cuesheet, dat, and the other review-sidecar fields are multiline in the existing review presentation even when the normalized value is a single line. With the current contains('\n') check, those history entries will fall back to inline rendering unless the text happens to contain a newline.
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
In `@src/routes/queue.rs` around lines 749 - 763, The multiline detection in
push_labeled_change_detail is too narrow because it only checks for newline
characters, so review-sidecar fields like contents, cuesheet, and dat may render
inline even though they should be multiline. Update the is_multiline decision to
also consider field semantics in this function, using the field identifier plus
the existing current_value/previous_value checks, so the known multiline fields
always get multiline presentation regardless of whether the normalized text
contains a newline.
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
2 participants
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.
Summary
Validation
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Bug Fixes