-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 218
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Remove general purpose dedupe toggle #33963
Merged
Merged
Changes from 2 commits
Commits
Show all changes
10 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
f50b500
gate dedupe updates behind existing toggle
mjriley 14db22e
Remove general dedupe toggle
mjriley fe4d281
update dedupe list description
mjriley addc6ec
Merge branch 'mjr/create_dedupe_privilege' into mjr/remove-dedupe-toggle
mjriley d386ead
Merge branch 'mjr/create_dedupe_privilege' into mjr/remove-dedupe-toggle
mjriley e986e6c
require pro plan or above to access dedupe features
mjriley faef877
add a frozen toggle to support the previous CASE_DEDUPE toggle
mjriley 35206f3
Merge branch 'mjr/dedupe_backfill' into mjr/remove-dedupe-toggle
mjriley 1d531e2
Correctly gate dedupe actions behind the proper toggle
mjriley d7d4cbc
Merge branch 'mjr/dedupe_backfill' into mjr/remove-dedupe-toggle
mjriley File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains 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
This file contains 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
This file contains 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
This file contains 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
This file contains 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
This file contains 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
This file contains 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
This file contains 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
This file contains 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
This file contains 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
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
do we want this to be a
FrozenPrivilegeToggle
so that new users can't be added to it?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for pointing this class out to me. The immediate problem is that I don't believe there is an associated privilege for dedupe, which I'm making sure isn't an oversight on my part. Beyond that, I'm not sure this is a great fit. It sounds like
FrozenPrivilegeToggle
is meant to duplicate privilege functionality for domains that don't have the privilege. In this case, this toggle is meant to be for domains that are grandfathered into still allowing case updates, which the GA feature will not allowThere was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think this is exactly what
FrozenPrivilegeToggle
was intended for.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can you clarify further? From that CEP, my understanding is that GA'd features become privileges on software plans. Existing domains that use the GA'd functionality may not belong to those software plans, and so
FrozenPrivilegeToggle
is intended to bridge that gap. But, whether it is the privilege or the toggle, both are supporting the exact same workflow.That last part is why I don't believe
FrozenPrivilegeToggle
is a good fit here. We are discussing different functionality: the GA'd feature will not allow updates, while the existing toggle still will (in fact, the toggle's sole purpose will be to support updates). I think its also reasonable to suspect that this update functionality will be open to domains being added and removed, because while we're GA-ing 75% of the feature, I imagine Solutions still wants to support clients that require 100% of the feature.