Ambika-Sony commented on PR #5597:
URL: https://github.com/apache/fineract/pull/5597#issuecomment-4048806504
I’ll take a closer look at the deletion you pointed out in the review and
restore the logic if it was removed accidentally during conflict resolution
and Working on a single PR together sounds good to me as well. That should
definitely help avoid duplicate changes and CI conflicts. I’ll sync with
your latest updates and adjust my changes accordingly.
On Thu, Mar 12, 2026 at 11:01 PM edk12564 ***@***.***> wrote:
> *edk12564* left a comment (apache/fineract#5597)
> <https://github.com/apache/fineract/pull/5597#issuecomment-4048644723>
>
> Hi @Ambika-Sony <https://github.com/Ambika-Sony>, I took a look at your
> PR. I think your tests are passing locally but failing on CI/CD because you
> also need to push the changes to in-use feign methods that you pulled from
> here. But considering this is the case, I wonder if we should just work on
> this 1 PR together. This would prevent the issue of us pushing the same
> code at the same time.
>
> What do you think about just working on this 1 PR together? I believe
> Fineract allows multiple users to commits to a PR as long as long as there
> is only 1 commit per user.
>
> I also saw a concerning deletion in your PR. Could you kindly take a look
> at my review when you have time? I wonder if this was a mistake, since we
> shouldn't be deleting logic for this type of change.
>
> *Hi,* I have consolidated my work for *FINERACT-2494* into a clean Pull
> Request (*#5615 <https://github.com/apache/fineract/pull/5615>*). I’ve
> merged the latest changes from upstream and resolved all local conflicts. I
> wanted to flag a discrepancy I'm seeing: - *Locally:* ./gradlew
> :fineract-client:compileJava passes successfully. - *On GitHub:* The
> build is currently showing *34 failing checks*. Given the high number of
> failures, I suspect there might be environment-related issues or broader
> build instabilities. Could you please take a look at the PR when you have a
> moment to see if these failures are related to my changes? Also, I wanted
> to confirm the best approach for the unit tests: should I keep them under
> *FINERACT-2494*, or would you prefer them moved to *FINERACT-2501*?
> … <#m_-58939957042714022_>
> On Thu, Mar 12, 2026 at 10:29 AM Ambika *@*.*> wrote: Hi , thank you for
> the update! I am completely on board with splitting the work 50/50. I've
> seen your latest push, Edward—I will pull those changes into my local
> environment shortly to sync up. I'll continue working on my assigned
> modules today. Great to be working with you both on this! On Thu, 12 Mar,
> 2026, 8:04 am edk12564, @.*> wrote: > *edk12564* left a comment (
> apache/fineract#5597 <https://github.com/apache/fineract/pull/5597>) >
<#5597
> (comment)
> <https://github.com/apache/fineract/pull/5597#issuecomment-4043487572>> >
> > sure. you can split ;) > > I see now after some reading that we can just
> have 2 PRs since the tests > in our PR get run. Sorry about that. > > I
> made a lot of progress, and build was working locally. However, I am > not
> done yet. I am just pushing so @Ambika-Sony
> <https://github.com/Ambika-Sony> > https://github.com/Ambika-Sony can
> access these changes. Since they > are required to pass builds/tests. > > I
> also found some endpoints in FinancialActivityAccountsApiResource that >
> were named createGLAccount. However, it seems these endpoints actually map
> > a GLAccount to a FinancialActivityAccount, and creating a GL Account is >
> done in GLAccountResourceApi. I changed the operationId here to more >
> closely match it's actual function. > > Thank you for being patient with
> me! > > Also, before merging, we must also make sure the order with
> Self-Service > removal is correct. Currently I left self-service changes
> in. However, when > the full merge to delete goes through, i can refactor
> to remove those > changes. Just depends on which gets merged first. > > — >
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > <#5597 (comment)
> <https://github.com/apache/fineract/pull/5597#issuecomment-4043487572>>,
> > or unsubscribe >
>
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/BIN7S2GGRKMAB3DPNTFQBOD4QIO2XAVCNFSM6AAAAACWLGS4MSVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHM2DANBTGQ4DONJXGI
> > . > You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: >
*@*.***>
> >
>
> —
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <https://github.com/apache/fineract/pull/5597#issuecomment-4048644723>,
> or unsubscribe
>
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/BIN7S2HAF22A57C7A6PA7VL4QLYAPAVCNFSM6AAAAACWLGS4MSVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHM2DANBYGY2DINZSGM>
> .
> You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
> ***@***.***>
>
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
