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

feat: User agreements API for generic agreement records #35895

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

xitij2000
Copy link
Contributor

@xitij2000 xitij2000 commented Nov 20, 2024

Description

This change adds a new kind of generic user agreement that allows plugins or even the core platform to record a user's acknowledgement of an agreement.

Supporting information

NA

Testing instructions

  • This creates a new REST API at /api/agreements/v1/agreement/<agreement_id>
  • You can use GET, which will return a 404 if a user hasn't acknowledged the agreement, or the timestamp of acceptance if they have
  • You can do a simple empty POST to mark acknowledgement
  • You can use the ?after=... query param with get to filter agreements after that date

Deadline

"None"

Open Questions

  • Perhaps the text of the licence / agreement etc should also be stored in a django model and versions in an update-only manner.

@openedx-webhooks openedx-webhooks added the open-source-contribution PR author is not from Axim or 2U label Nov 20, 2024
@openedx-webhooks
Copy link

Thanks for the pull request, @xitij2000!

What's next?

Please work through the following steps to get your changes ready for engineering review:

🔘 Get product approval

If you haven't already, check this list to see if your contribution needs to go through the product review process.

  • If it does, you'll need to submit a product proposal for your contribution, and have it reviewed by the Product Working Group.
    • This process (including the steps you'll need to take) is documented here.
  • If it doesn't, simply proceed with the next step.

🔘 Provide context

To help your reviewers and other members of the community understand the purpose and larger context of your changes, feel free to add as much of the following information to the PR description as you can:

  • Dependencies

    This PR must be merged before / after / at the same time as ...

  • Blockers

    This PR is waiting for OEP-1234 to be accepted.

  • Timeline information

    This PR must be merged by XX date because ...

  • Partner information

    This is for a course on edx.org.

  • Supporting documentation
  • Relevant Open edX discussion forum threads

🔘 Get a green build

If one or more checks are failing, continue working on your changes until this is no longer the case and your build turns green.

🔘 Let us know that your PR is ready for review:

Who will review my changes?

This repository is currently maintained by @openedx/wg-maintenance-edx-platform. Tag them in a comment and let them know that your changes are ready for review.

Where can I find more information?

If you'd like to get more details on all aspects of the review process for open source pull requests (OSPRs), check out the following resources:

When can I expect my changes to be merged?

Our goal is to get community contributions seen and reviewed as efficiently as possible.

However, the amount of time that it takes to review and merge a PR can vary significantly based on factors such as:

  • The size and impact of the changes that it introduces
  • The need for product review
  • Maintenance status of the parent repository

💡 As a result it may take up to several weeks or months to complete a review and merge your PR.

This change adds a new kind of generic user agreement that allows plugins or
even the core platform to record a user's acknowledgement of an agreement.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
open-source-contribution PR author is not from Axim or 2U
Projects
Status: Waiting on Author
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants