jacobh2
782415122d
The calendar mixed two kinds of truth in one table. `planned_leave_day` was simultaneously the allocator's output cache, the user's override store (`is_pinned`, plus ad-hoc rows with no `wish_id`), and the resource ledger that analytics and the age-4 maths read. The planner therefore had to ask "am I allowed to touch this row?" on every sync, and got it wrong at the edges. Every user assertion is now one `day_assertion` row — a concrete `day_type` replaces a pinned day, a row with no `wish_id` replaces an ad-hoc day, and `day_type='none'` replaces `planned_day_exclusion`. `planned_leave_day` becomes purely derived with a single writer, and `PlanningService.pinned_keys()` is the single answer to "is this day pinned", used by the allocator's loader, by `sync_plan` and by the read router alike. On top of that, every calendar band is now a real event: an ad-hoc band opens the same full editor as a wish-backed one and saving it promotes it to a `LeaveWish`, so it can be named, repeated yearly, assigned to either or both parents, and handed to the planner. "Planering" is a `moveable` toggle plus a from/to month bound plus a separate lock/unlock action on the days themselves, replacing a three-rung ladder whose "planner decides" rung set a search window equal to the drawn dates and so could never move anything. Bugs found and fixed along the way: - The plan erased its own history. Fixed windows clip to today, so an elapsed auto-placed day fell into `stale_keys` and was deleted on the next sync — and a background sync runs on every workspace load. Past rows are now frozen and counted as spent. - Migration 010's downgrade silently destroyed every pinned day and exclusion (`is_pinned` returned as DEFAULT 0, the exclusion table came back empty, exit 0, no warning). It now reconstructs both from `day_assertion`, and 009 itemises what it cannot recover before dropping the table. - Deleting a period left its assertions behind, locking those dates forever with no UI path to clear them. Wish deletion now clears them by `wish_id`. - `DayAssertionService` and `LeaveWishService` committed multi-statement writes without a transaction; a crash mid-write diverged the tables or half-deleted a series. Both now run in a unit of work. - A sibling year's shortfall was never surfaced: the toast only inspected the edited occurrence's outcome, so a fully unfunded later year rendered as an empty band with no warning. - A flexible window whose bound had entirely elapsed was dropped from the proposal with no outcome at all. It now reports as `unplaced`. - Unlocking a period deleted its days instead of returning them to the planner. - The e2e global setup posted to a route deleted in this change, which would have failed the whole suite before its first test. Gates: backend 938 tests / 91% coverage, frontend 1351 / 97.4 | 92.2 | 94.37 | 97.4. Migrations 009 and 010 audited against a hand-built realistic database: the upgrade reconciles exactly and a constraint violation fails safe, leaving the schema at 008. Not complete. Step 4's toggle, month picker and lock/unlock action are verified by browser walk and unit tests, but the partial-lock readout was not exercised. `ideas.md` §7 adds a full plan for the vacation-forfeiture defect (the planner detects expiring days and then does nothing about them) — not implemented here. Remaining smaller items are listed in the session's restructure notes. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01T4wjgbVL4HAC5Rdaw75VbV
84 lines
3.2 KiB
Python
84 lines
3.2 KiB
Python
"""HTTP routes for day assertions — restructure step 3b.
|
|
|
|
Replaces the write side of the legacy `/api/planned-days` (hand-pin/ad-hoc)
|
|
and `/api/planned-day-exclusions` endpoints (both deleted this step) with one
|
|
endpoint expressing all three: a pin (`day_type` concrete), an ad-hoc day
|
|
(`wish_id` omitted), and an exclusion (`day_type='none'`). Routers stay
|
|
thin: validate via Pydantic, call the service, map domain errors to HTTP.
|
|
"""
|
|
|
|
from datetime import date
|
|
from uuid import UUID
|
|
|
|
from fastapi import APIRouter, HTTPException, status
|
|
|
|
from app.dependencies import (
|
|
DayAssertionServiceDep,
|
|
WorkspaceIdDep,
|
|
WorkspaceScopeDep,
|
|
)
|
|
from app.models.day_assertion import DayAssertionCreate, DayAssertionResponse
|
|
from app.utils.errors import ValidationError
|
|
|
|
router = APIRouter(prefix="/api/day-assertions", tags=["day-assertions"])
|
|
|
|
|
|
@router.post("", response_model=DayAssertionResponse, status_code=status.HTTP_201_CREATED)
|
|
async def assert_day(
|
|
payload: DayAssertionCreate,
|
|
service: DayAssertionServiceDep,
|
|
scope: WorkspaceScopeDep,
|
|
) -> DayAssertionResponse:
|
|
scope.check_workspace(payload.workspace_id)
|
|
await scope.check_child(payload.child_id)
|
|
await scope.check_member(payload.parent_personal_data_uuid)
|
|
try:
|
|
entity = await service.assert_day(
|
|
workspace_id=payload.workspace_id,
|
|
child_id=payload.child_id,
|
|
parent_personal_data_uuid=payload.parent_personal_data_uuid,
|
|
day=payload.date,
|
|
day_type=payload.day_type,
|
|
is_dubbeldag=payload.is_dubbeldag,
|
|
wish_id=payload.wish_id,
|
|
)
|
|
except ValidationError as exc:
|
|
if exc.message_key:
|
|
raise HTTPException(
|
|
status.HTTP_422_UNPROCESSABLE_ENTITY,
|
|
detail={"message_key": exc.message_key, "data": exc.data},
|
|
) from exc
|
|
raise HTTPException(status.HTTP_422_UNPROCESSABLE_ENTITY, str(exc)) from exc
|
|
return DayAssertionResponse.from_entity(entity)
|
|
|
|
|
|
@router.get("/workspace/{workspace_id}", response_model=list[DayAssertionResponse])
|
|
async def list_day_assertions(
|
|
workspace_id: WorkspaceIdDep, service: DayAssertionServiceDep
|
|
) -> list[DayAssertionResponse]:
|
|
entities = await service.list_for_workspace(workspace_id)
|
|
return [DayAssertionResponse.from_entity(e) for e in entities]
|
|
|
|
|
|
@router.delete("", status_code=status.HTTP_204_NO_CONTENT)
|
|
async def clear_day_assertion(
|
|
service: DayAssertionServiceDep,
|
|
scope: WorkspaceScopeDep,
|
|
workspace_id: UUID,
|
|
child_id: UUID,
|
|
parent_personal_data_uuid: UUID,
|
|
date: date,
|
|
) -> None:
|
|
"""Retract the assertion at this (workspace, child, parent, date), if
|
|
|
|
any — idempotent, matching `DayAssertionService.clear`. By natural key
|
|
rather than by id: every caller (un-pinning a hand-added day, deleting
|
|
an ad-hoc band, restoring an exclusion) already knows the key from
|
|
context and would otherwise have to look the assertion up first just to
|
|
delete it.
|
|
"""
|
|
scope.check_workspace(workspace_id)
|
|
await scope.check_child(child_id)
|
|
await scope.check_member(parent_personal_data_uuid)
|
|
await service.clear(workspace_id, child_id, parent_personal_data_uuid, date)
|