Issue Number | 402 |
---|---|
Summary | [Alerts] Board Member Number of Assigned Reviews To Be Completed |
Created | 2016-09-21 17:58:22 |
Issue Type | Bug |
Submitted By | Juthe, Robin (NIH/NCI) [E] |
Assigned To | Kline, Bob (NIH/NCI) [C] |
Status | Closed |
Resolved | 2017-06-02 11:14:40 |
Resolution | Fixed |
Path | /home/bkline/backups/jira/oceebms/issue.194598 |
I'm not sure how the number of assigned reviews is being calculated. However, we would like it to exclude FYI articles and articles that have received a decision by the Editorial Board and no longer have a "REVIEW" button beside them.
On DEV, Test Board Member 3 currently has two packets on her Assigned Packets page.
The "Genetics of Breast and Ovarian Cancer (September 2016)" packet includes 2 articles for review and 2 FYI articles.
The "Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (September 2016)" packet includes 1 article that has been reviewed by the Board, 1 article that she has already reviewed, 2 FYI articles, and 3 assigned articles for review.
The total number of reviews that should show up in her alert is 2 (for the breast packet) + 3 (for the GIST packet) = 5. However, the total I'm seeing is 13.
Bob, I confirmed that this problem is also on QA (so it's likely on PROD, too).
Why is this filed as a bug report instead of an enhancement request?
I'm not sure how the number of assigned reviews is being calculated.
From the code, here's the logic we've been using:
// To count unreviewed articles, we need to know:
// 1. is the article in a packet assigned to this board member?
// 2. is the packet still active?
// 3. has the board member already posted a review for the article?
I will rewrite the code to reflect the new requirements.
I have modified the logic on DEV to exclude articles from the count which
have a current state of 'FYI' for the packet's topic; or
have a current state with a higher sequence number than used for PassedFullReview
The count for Test Board Member 3 is now six (I suspect another packet assignment has been made since your analysis above).
So far so good on DEV, but this will need more thorough testing on QA.
Verified on QA.
Verified on PROD.
Elapsed: 0:00:00.000710