Skip to content
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

🧹🥗 Journal: Add Entry#summary field #8

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jan 29, 2024

Conversation

zspencer
Copy link
Member

@zspencer zspencer commented Jan 29, 2024

What I'm driving towards here is similar to
zinc-collective#2055, where a Journal::Entry has an affordance for being opinionated about how it's represented when linked to in search engines or peer-to-peer sharing; as well as short text for when there are a several on Journal#show.

- #6

What I'm driving towards here is similar to
zinc-collective#2055, where a
`Journal::Entry` has an affordance for being opinionated about how it's
represented when linked to in search engines or peer-to-peer sharing; as
well as short text for when there are a several on `Journal#show`.
zspencer added a commit to zinc-collective/convene that referenced this pull request Jan 29, 2024
- zinc-collective#2
- zinc-collective#6
- zinc-collective#4

Clearly, when I started
zinc-collective#8 I used the
wrong name. It's not an `Entry#description`, it's an `Entry#summary`!

Perhaps that would have been more obvious had I started with the spec,
rather than the data model. Ah well, inside out and outside in are both
valid.
@zspencer zspencer changed the base branch from main to journal/entry-summaries January 29, 2024 03:20
zspencer added a commit to zinc-collective/convene that referenced this pull request Jan 29, 2024
- zinc-collective#8
- zinc-collective#10

When I started on this, I started with [changes to the data
layer], because that's where my brain tends to naturally start.

But when I wrote the [system test], I realized it was more of an
[`Entries#summary`].

So I am renaming from `Entries#description` to `Entries#summary`.

Thank you for coming to my TED Talk.

[`Entries#summary`]: zinc-collective#9
[system test]: zinc-collective#9
[changes to the data layer]: zinc-collective#8
- #8
- #10

When I started on this, I started with [changes to the data
layer], because that's where my brain tends to naturally start.

But when I wrote the [system test], I realized it was more of an
[`Entries#summary`].

So I am renaming from `Entries#description` to `Entries#summary`.

Thank you for coming to my TED Talk.

[`Entries#summary`]: #9
[system test]: #9
[changes to the data layer]: #8
zspencer added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 29, 2024
- #2
- #6
- #4

Clearly, when I started
#8 I used the
wrong name. It's not an `Entry#description`, it's an `Entry#summary`!

Perhaps that would have been more obvious had I started with the spec,
rather than the data model. Ah well, inside out and outside in are both
valid.
While working on
#11, I completely
forgot to run the tests locally. Embaressing, right? But I've grown
overly used to codebases where running tests takes minutes-not-seconds;
and there's not an easy way to "scope" the tests run to just the code
that matters.

Also I'm hacking while high, sue me!

Anyway, people forget things... For reasons. And this time I forgot
this, which exposed a hole in the safety-net in my weird multi-repo
experiment.

So I patched the hole in the bottom of the sea...
sea: #12

Which uncovered a log in the hole in the bottom of the sea:
zinc-collective#2160

So now I'm finishing the refactor and putting the frog on the log in the
hole of the bottom of the sea, so that I can feed a gnat to the frog on
the log in the hole of the bottom of the sea and implement the form
fields to capture the `Entry#summary`
zspencer added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 29, 2024
- #2
- #6
- #4

Clearly, when I started
#8 I used the
wrong name. It's not an `Entry#description`, it's an `Entry#summary`!

Perhaps that would have been more obvious had I started with the spec,
rather than the data model. Ah well, inside out and outside in are both
valid.
@zspencer zspencer changed the title 🧹🥗 Journal: Add Entry#description field 🧹🥗 Journal: Add Entry#summary field Jan 29, 2024
@zspencer zspencer merged commit e6aa446 into journal/entry-summaries Jan 29, 2024
@zspencer zspencer deleted the journal/entry/short-description branch January 29, 2024 04:40
zspencer added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 29, 2024
- #2
- #6
- #4

Clearly, when I started
#8 I used the
wrong name. It's not an `Entry#description`, it's an `Entry#summary`!

Perhaps that would have been more obvious had I started with the spec,
rather than the data model. Ah well, inside out and outside in are both
valid.
zspencer added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 29, 2024
- #2
- #6
- #4

Clearly, when I started
#8 I used the
wrong name. It's not an `Entry#description`, it's an `Entry#summary`!

Perhaps that would have been more obvious had I started with the spec,
rather than the data model. Ah well, inside out and outside in are both
valid.
zspencer added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 29, 2024
- #10

What I'm driving towards here is similar to
zinc-collective#2055, where a
`Journal::Entry` has an affordance for being opinionated about how it's
represented when linked to in search engines or peer-to-peer sharing; as
well as short text for when there are a several on `Journal#show`.
zspencer added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 3, 2024
- #10

What I'm driving towards here is similar to
zinc-collective#2055, where a
`Journal::Entry` has an affordance for being opinionated about how it's
represented when linked to in search engines or peer-to-peer sharing; as
well as short text for when there are a several on `Journal#show`.
zspencer added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 3, 2024
- When #2, add an #10 so we can eventually display it when #4


* 🧹🥗 `Journal`: Add `Entry#summary` field (#8)

- #10

What I'm driving towards here is similar to
zinc-collective#2055, where a
`Journal::Entry` has an affordance for being opinionated about how it's
represented when linked to in search engines or peer-to-peer sharing; as
well as short text for when there are a several on `Journal#show`.

* 🛠️ `Journal`: Test only the `Journal in CI

While working on
#11, I realized I
missed a piece of the refactor because I was leaning-on-ci as a way to
confirm that everything was working as expected.

Little did I know, CI was not working in this fork. Which makes sense,
because you don't want to automatically turn on all the Workflows when
you fork a project.

This adds a Github Workflow for testing *just* the `Journal`, which
should make detecting oopsie-daisys a bit easier for folks who are only
interested in working on the Journal.

* 🥗 `Journal`: Test adding `Entry#summary` when Writing `Entries`

- #10
- #2

This is a quick line-of-action end-to-end test for setting an `Entry#summary`.

* ✨ `Journal`: Save `Entry#summary` when Writing `Entries`

- #2
- #10

And just like that, there's a `Summary` field on the
`Journal::Entry#new` page!
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant