Skip to content

Update well inventory CSV feature header expectations #595

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Closed
marissafichera wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Update well inventory CSV feature header expectations #595

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 0 additions & 2 deletions tests/features/well-inventory-csv.feature
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -1,4 +1,3 @@
@production
@backend
Copy link

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector bot Mar 10, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

P1 Badge Restore @production tag on this feature

I checked the Run BDD tests step in .github/workflows/tests.yml (line 189), which runs behave with --tags="@backend and @production and not @skip"; removing the file-level @production tag here means every scenario in this feature is now excluded from that CI suite. This silently drops coverage for the well-inventory CSV flow and can allow regressions in production-gated behavior to merge undetected unless @production is added back (file-level or scenario-level).

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

@cli
@BDMS-TBD
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -123,7 +122,6 @@ Feature: Bulk upload well inventory from CSV via CLI
| well_hole_status |
| well_status |
| monitoring_frequency |
| monitoring_status |
Copy link
Contributor

@ksmuczynski ksmuczynski Mar 11, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think monitoring_status should be kept. Can you explain the reasoning for removing it?

Copy link
Member

@jirhiker jirhiker Mar 11, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The users do not want a separate field for monitoring_status. They want to combine the monitoring frequency and monitoring status in the same way as on the well inventory form. The backend will just need to parse the monitoring_frequency column and save data to the appropriate database fields. The csv does not need to be a 1:1 reflection of the database

| sampling_scenario_notes |
| well_notes |
| well_measuring_notes |
Expand Down
Loading