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
134 lines
5.2 KiB
Python
134 lines
5.2 KiB
Python
"""API-level test for `POST /api/plan/sync-with-wish`.
|
|
|
|
Exercises the router + Pydantic wire models (not just the service directly,
|
|
which `tests/unit/test_planning_service_sync_with_wish.py` already covers) —
|
|
this catches the class of bug where the router/model layer drops or
|
|
mis-names a field on the way to `PlanningService.sync_with_wish`, or where
|
|
the "exactly one of wish_create/wish_update" request validation is wired
|
|
wrong.
|
|
"""
|
|
|
|
from uuid import uuid4
|
|
|
|
from httpx import AsyncClient
|
|
|
|
from tests.conftest import SeededIds
|
|
|
|
|
|
class TestSyncWithWishRequestValidation:
|
|
async def test_neither_wish_create_nor_wish_update_is_422(
|
|
self, authed_client: AsyncClient, seeded_ids: SeededIds
|
|
) -> None:
|
|
response = await authed_client.post(
|
|
"/api/plan/sync-with-wish", json={"workspace_id": str(seeded_ids.workspace_id)}
|
|
)
|
|
assert response.status_code == 422
|
|
|
|
async def test_both_wish_create_and_wish_update_is_422(
|
|
self, authed_client: AsyncClient, seeded_ids: SeededIds
|
|
) -> None:
|
|
response = await authed_client.post(
|
|
"/api/plan/sync-with-wish",
|
|
json={
|
|
"workspace_id": str(seeded_ids.workspace_id),
|
|
"wish_create": {
|
|
"name": "X",
|
|
"window_start_month": 6,
|
|
"window_start_day": 1,
|
|
"window_end_month": 6,
|
|
"window_end_day": 7,
|
|
"target_weeks": 1,
|
|
"first_year": 2027,
|
|
},
|
|
"wish_update": {"leave_wish_id": str(uuid4()), "patch": {}},
|
|
},
|
|
)
|
|
assert response.status_code == 422
|
|
|
|
|
|
class TestSyncWithWishCreatesAndFunds:
|
|
async def test_wish_create_round_trips_and_days_are_persisted(
|
|
self, authed_client: AsyncClient, seeded_ids: SeededIds
|
|
) -> None:
|
|
response = await authed_client.post(
|
|
"/api/plan/sync-with-wish",
|
|
json={
|
|
"workspace_id": str(seeded_ids.workspace_id),
|
|
"wish_create": {
|
|
"child_id": str(seeded_ids.child_id),
|
|
"name": "Sommar",
|
|
"window_start_month": 6,
|
|
"window_start_day": 1,
|
|
"window_end_month": 6,
|
|
"window_end_day": 7,
|
|
"target_weeks": 1,
|
|
"target_days": 7,
|
|
"first_year": 2027,
|
|
},
|
|
},
|
|
)
|
|
assert response.status_code == 200, response.text
|
|
body = response.json()
|
|
assert body["wish"]["name"] == "Sommar"
|
|
assert body["sync"]["apply_result"]["accepted"] is True
|
|
|
|
wish_id = body["wish"]["id"]
|
|
wishes = await authed_client.get(f"/api/leave-wishes/{seeded_ids.workspace_id}")
|
|
assert any(w["id"] == wish_id for w in wishes.json())
|
|
|
|
days = await authed_client.get(
|
|
"/api/planned-days", params={"child_id": str(seeded_ids.child_id)}
|
|
)
|
|
assert any(d["wish_id"] == wish_id for d in days.json())
|
|
|
|
async def test_day_actions_attach_an_ad_hoc_pinned_day_to_the_new_wish(
|
|
self, authed_client: AsyncClient, seeded_ids: SeededIds
|
|
) -> None:
|
|
# An ad-hoc, hand-pinned day (restructure step 3b: `POST
|
|
# /api/day-assertions`, which mirrors into `planned_leave_day`
|
|
# immediately) — the "day_actions" below need that mirrored row's
|
|
# id, not the assertion's own.
|
|
created_assertion = await authed_client.post(
|
|
"/api/day-assertions",
|
|
json={
|
|
"workspace_id": str(seeded_ids.workspace_id),
|
|
"child_id": str(seeded_ids.child_id),
|
|
"parent_personal_data_uuid": str(seeded_ids.personal_data_uuid),
|
|
"date": "2027-08-02",
|
|
"day_type": "vacation",
|
|
},
|
|
)
|
|
assert created_assertion.status_code == 201, created_assertion.text
|
|
|
|
planned = await authed_client.get(
|
|
"/api/planned-days", params={"child_id": str(seeded_ids.child_id)}
|
|
)
|
|
day_id = next(d["id"] for d in planned.json() if d["date"] == "2027-08-02")
|
|
|
|
response = await authed_client.post(
|
|
"/api/plan/sync-with-wish",
|
|
json={
|
|
"workspace_id": str(seeded_ids.workspace_id),
|
|
"wish_create": {
|
|
"child_id": str(seeded_ids.child_id),
|
|
"name": "Promoted",
|
|
"window_start_month": 8,
|
|
"window_start_day": 2,
|
|
"window_end_month": 8,
|
|
"window_end_day": 2,
|
|
"target_weeks": 1,
|
|
"target_days": 1,
|
|
"first_year": 2027,
|
|
"window_mode": "fixed",
|
|
},
|
|
"day_actions": [{"planned_day_id": day_id, "action": "attach"}],
|
|
},
|
|
)
|
|
assert response.status_code == 200, response.text
|
|
body = response.json()
|
|
assert body["sync"]["apply_result"]["accepted"] is True
|
|
|
|
day_after = await authed_client.get(f"/api/planned-days/{day_id}")
|
|
assert day_after.json()["wish_id"] == body["wish"]["id"]
|
|
assert day_after.json()["is_pinned"] is True
|