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
152 lines
7.1 KiB
Python
152 lines
7.1 KiB
Python
"""HTTP routes for the planning engine.
|
|
|
|
Routers stay thin: validate via Pydantic, call the service, map domain errors
|
|
to HTTP. All allocation logic lives in `app.services.allocation_service`, and
|
|
all bulk-apply logic (idempotency, collisions, `replace`, validation) lives in
|
|
`app.services.planning_service.PlanningService.apply_proposed_days`. See
|
|
PLANNING_ENGINE_SPEC.md §4.
|
|
"""
|
|
|
|
from fastapi import APIRouter, HTTPException, status
|
|
|
|
from app.dependencies import PlanningEngineServiceDep, PlanningServiceDep, WorkspaceScopeDep
|
|
from app.models.plan import (
|
|
PlanApplyRequest,
|
|
PlanApplyResponse,
|
|
PlanProposalResponse,
|
|
PlanProposeRequest,
|
|
PlanSyncRequest,
|
|
PlanSyncResponse,
|
|
PlanSyncWithWishRequest,
|
|
PlanSyncWithWishResponse,
|
|
)
|
|
from app.utils.errors import NotFoundError, ValidationError
|
|
|
|
router = APIRouter(prefix="/api/plan", tags=["plan"])
|
|
|
|
|
|
@router.post("/propose", response_model=PlanProposalResponse)
|
|
async def propose_plan(
|
|
payload: PlanProposeRequest, service: PlanningEngineServiceDep, scope: WorkspaceScopeDep
|
|
) -> PlanProposalResponse:
|
|
"""Compute a plan proposal. Read-only — persists nothing, safe to spam."""
|
|
scope.check_workspace(payload.workspace_id)
|
|
try:
|
|
proposal = await service.propose(payload.workspace_id)
|
|
except NotFoundError as exc:
|
|
raise HTTPException(status.HTTP_404_NOT_FOUND, str(exc)) from exc
|
|
except ValidationError as exc:
|
|
raise HTTPException(status.HTTP_422_UNPROCESSABLE_ENTITY, str(exc)) from exc
|
|
return PlanProposalResponse.from_domain(proposal)
|
|
|
|
|
|
@router.post("/apply", response_model=PlanApplyResponse)
|
|
async def apply_plan(
|
|
payload: PlanApplyRequest, service: PlanningServiceDep, scope: WorkspaceScopeDep
|
|
) -> PlanApplyResponse:
|
|
"""Accept a (possibly user-edited) set of proposed days as real plan.
|
|
|
|
Always returns 200 with `accepted: false` and a `rejections`/`collisions`
|
|
breakdown when the batch is refused — refusal (a collision without
|
|
`replace`, an invalid day type, a balance/eligibility violation) is an
|
|
expected, structured outcome for the UI to render, not an HTTP error.
|
|
A genuinely missing workspace/child (404) is the one case still raised
|
|
as an HTTP error, since that's not something the batch report can explain.
|
|
"""
|
|
scope.check_workspace(payload.workspace_id)
|
|
# Every child/parent named in the batch must belong to the caller's own
|
|
# workspace too — otherwise a forged child_id/parent_personal_data_uuid
|
|
# could write a planned_leave_day row attributed to another tenant's
|
|
# child or parent even though workspace_id itself checks out.
|
|
for child_id in {item.child_id for item in payload.days}:
|
|
await scope.check_child(child_id)
|
|
for parent_id in {item.parent_personal_data_uuid for item in payload.days}:
|
|
await scope.check_member(parent_id)
|
|
try:
|
|
result = await service.apply_proposed_days(
|
|
workspace_id=payload.workspace_id,
|
|
days=[item.to_domain() for item in payload.days],
|
|
replace=payload.replace,
|
|
)
|
|
except NotFoundError as exc:
|
|
raise HTTPException(status.HTTP_404_NOT_FOUND, str(exc)) from exc
|
|
return PlanApplyResponse.from_domain(result)
|
|
|
|
|
|
@router.post("/sync", response_model=PlanSyncResponse)
|
|
async def sync_plan(
|
|
payload: PlanSyncRequest, service: PlanningServiceDep, scope: WorkspaceScopeDep
|
|
) -> PlanSyncResponse:
|
|
"""Recompute and persist a workspace's plan in one step.
|
|
|
|
The direct-manipulation calendar UX's one call: no separate preview
|
|
step. Runs propose then apply internally (see
|
|
`PlanningService.sync_plan`), never retyping or overwriting a day the
|
|
user has pinned, and reports exactly what changed (`changes`) so the UI
|
|
can show e.g. "Sommar 2028 flyttades 2 dagar — Ångra" instead of
|
|
silently rewriting the calendar.
|
|
|
|
When the re-derived plan would displace another wish's already-placed
|
|
days (a shared FP/vacation pool ran out for that wish's parent), this
|
|
call still writes — displacement is a normal, informational outcome, not
|
|
a refusal. The displaced rows come back as 'removed' entries in
|
|
`changes` with `evicted: true` (see `PlanChange`/`PlanChangeResponse`),
|
|
so the UI can call them out distinctly instead of silently rewriting the
|
|
calendar. See `PlanningService.sync_plan`'s docstring.
|
|
"""
|
|
scope.check_workspace(payload.workspace_id)
|
|
try:
|
|
result = await service.sync_plan(payload.workspace_id)
|
|
except NotFoundError as exc:
|
|
raise HTTPException(status.HTTP_404_NOT_FOUND, str(exc)) from exc
|
|
except ValidationError as exc:
|
|
raise HTTPException(status.HTTP_422_UNPROCESSABLE_ENTITY, str(exc)) from exc
|
|
return PlanSyncResponse.from_domain(result)
|
|
|
|
|
|
@router.post("/sync-with-wish", response_model=PlanSyncWithWishResponse)
|
|
async def sync_plan_with_wish(
|
|
payload: PlanSyncWithWishRequest, service: PlanningServiceDep, scope: WorkspaceScopeDep
|
|
) -> PlanSyncWithWishResponse:
|
|
"""One atomic call: create-or-update the `LeaveWish` behind a calendar
|
|
|
|
period, apply the day-lock/detach list, and sync — all in one unit of
|
|
work (`PlanningService.sync_with_wish`). Replaces the client-orchestrated
|
|
"create/patch the wish, then re-point or delete the affected planned
|
|
days, then sync" 3-phase sequence (and the compensating rollback it
|
|
needed) that used to back the calendar's promote/draw/edit/preset paths:
|
|
a rejected sync now rolls back the wish write and every day-lock action
|
|
with it, server-side, so the frontend never needs to undo a half-applied
|
|
edit by hand.
|
|
|
|
Same "always 200, `accepted: false` is a structured outcome" contract as
|
|
`POST /api/plan/sync` — see that endpoint's docstring. The one case still
|
|
raised as an HTTP error is a genuinely missing/foreign workspace, child,
|
|
parent, wish, or `planned_day_id` (404), or invalid wish fields (422).
|
|
"""
|
|
scope.check_workspace(payload.workspace_id)
|
|
if payload.wish_create is not None:
|
|
if payload.wish_create.child_id is not None:
|
|
await scope.check_child(payload.wish_create.child_id)
|
|
if payload.wish_create.parent_personal_data_uuid is not None:
|
|
await scope.check_member(payload.wish_create.parent_personal_data_uuid)
|
|
if payload.wish_update is not None:
|
|
patch = payload.wish_update.patch
|
|
if patch.child_id is not None:
|
|
await scope.check_child(patch.child_id)
|
|
if patch.parent_personal_data_uuid is not None:
|
|
await scope.check_member(patch.parent_personal_data_uuid)
|
|
|
|
try:
|
|
result = await service.sync_with_wish(
|
|
workspace_id=payload.workspace_id,
|
|
wish_create=payload.wish_create.to_domain() if payload.wish_create else None,
|
|
wish_update=payload.wish_update.to_domain() if payload.wish_update else None,
|
|
day_actions=[a.to_domain() for a in payload.day_actions],
|
|
)
|
|
except NotFoundError as exc:
|
|
raise HTTPException(status.HTTP_404_NOT_FOUND, str(exc)) from exc
|
|
except ValidationError as exc:
|
|
raise HTTPException(status.HTTP_422_UNPROCESSABLE_ENTITY, str(exc)) from exc
|
|
return PlanSyncWithWishResponse.from_domain(result)
|