Reference Application 2.9 Testing

:+1: it looks good to me, thanks @reubenv,. Now what about including the dependency in the distro project? Can this be done quickly as well or it requires a ticket + PR… etc?

Yes it requires a ticket for documentation purposes.

@mksd re: attachments release… looks like I made the tag locally but forgot to push it up, I just did so, thanks for double-checking!

1 Like

@reubenv How are you doing? Are you having any blockers or is there any activity during this testing process where I can assist to expedite the process?

Hi @c.antwi , the testing phase has already begun. In fact, I was hoping to proceed towards final release should we not have any bugs. So far there have been no bug reports. Before the final release however, I’ll have to create a small commit to include the attachments module

@reubenv the fact that you want to include another module means that you will have to update the testing server and then call for another round of testing, before you can release.

Do you have a notes pad where people type the results of their testing and any bugs or findings?

Here is an example for the last release: RefApp 2.8.0 volunteers needed

Hi @dkayiwa, I have raised a pr for adding the Attachments module to the Ref App distro here. I was unaware of the notepad and naively thought that the bugs would be reported in the thread :sweat_smile: . I have also updated the op to include the same.

Notepad

1 Like

@reubenv did you run your changes and confirm that you are actually able to add attachments to a patient from the patient dashboard?

@dkayiwa @reubenv and others, am I correct to assume that the reason why Ref App and Core Apps have not been released yet is precisely because the current QA process is still ongoing?

Cc @amine

That is correct.

Yes, @dkayiwa, I have commented on the task and also mentioned on IRC but I guess you were offline.

To reiterate, yes it is working :smile:

Yes @mksd, that’s correct. We will probably have the release in the next few days once the testing phase ends(should there be no major issues) :slight_smile:

1 Like

@mksd did you say that coreapps was not released? I thought we released it a number of weeks ago.

@reubenv are you sure you added them without any errors and you are able to view them on the patient dashboard, on a brand new setup? Are you also monitoring the errors reported on the notepad?

The distro still packages Core Apps 1.21.0-SNAPSHOT (when master = 2cf0d92):

<coreappsVersion>1.21.0-SNAPSHOT</coreappsVersion>

As for Core Apps its latest commit right now contains a POM that is still versioned at 1.21.0-SNAPSHOT (when master = da52d19):

<artifactId>coreapps</artifactId>
<version>1.21.0-SNAPSHOT</version>

The agreed version on the wiki was 1.20.0 but since then, a commit has been made for AM-184 which is good enough to be considered for the reference application 2.9.0 release.

Ok so Core Apps is virtually released and packaged as 1.21.0 and the Ref App module is the last one undergoing QA right?

Depending on the test results, we may need to make new releases for a couple of modules to incorporate the subsequent fixes. Core Apps is just one of them.

@dkayiwa , I just looked at the issue reported in the notes. That particular concept was what we had removed as part of updating the concepts to the latest version of CIEL. Here’s the commit for the same.

So, in my opinion, we could fix this in two ways: a) We could point the sticky notes value to another concept ( if that’s okay, not really sure) Or b) We could add the concept back

What course of action do you feel would be suitable?

Can you ask @akanter if that concept is already part of the latest CIEL dictionary?