I'm confused - in your email you say changes were made as follows:

*In app/models/teammate_review_questionnaire.rb:*

*> @@ -7,11 +7,9 @@ def symbol
>      return "teammate".to_sym
>    end
>
> -  def get_assessments_for(participant)
> +  def get_teammate_reviews_for(participant)*

We refactored the questionnaire controller, but I don't recall ever making
a change in teammate_review_questionnaire.rb. (In fact, I'm absolutely
positive I didn't). The only possibility I see for code having been where
you referenced above is when we ran the automated refactor in RubyMine (for
example, if we refactored/changed the name of a method in one place,
RubyMine would change the name everywhere in the code it was called.) The
automated refactoring could/would have changed names in places outside of
the scope of the code we were actually working on.

Our *direct* changes were only to questionnaire, questionnaire_controller,
advice_controller, and the view for advice (and the permissions added).
There probably were incidental changes as described above when using
automated refactoring, but to the best of my knowledge, no code was
manually changed anywhere else (unless someone else in the group made
changes I am not aware of).

Dan or Eric, please comment on the above if I am totally wrong, or not
aware of/missing something important.



Your second comment:

*Not sure if renaming this method and the one in review_questionnaire is a
good refactoring choice.*

This was per our discussion with Dr Gehringer. We had a meeting with him
before doing any refactoring, and he made some suggestions and presented
expectations for what needed to be changed. There may have been a
legitimate reason for the original naming, but during our code review, it
was mentioned as not following the standard, or at least being somewhat
ambiguous.



Unit tests: There were quite a few failing unit tests before we touched the
code. In addition, there were view problems in the untouched code as well
(for example, trying to save changes to advice would save them
correctly, but the call to the next view would fail.) For the code we
submitted, there were no new failing unit tests introduced, but we did not
correct the ones that were failing to begin with.



It is worth mentioning that the code we started with had differences in the
GUI from the production code that Dr Gehringer noted when we started.



If you would like, it would be no problem to get the group together to
discuss what we did, and even roll back inappropriate or
questionable refactorings (with Dr Gehringers approval).


On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 10:55 PM, Pamela Ocampo <notifications@github.com>wrote:

> In test/unit/assignment_team_test.rb:
>
> > @@ -67,7 +67,7 @@ def test_scores_view
> >      scores[:participant] = AssignmentParticipant.find_by_parent_id(assignments(:assignment0))
> >      questionnaire1.each do |questionnaire|
> >        scores[questionnaire.symbol] = Hash.new
> > -      scores[questionnaire.symbol][:assessments] = questionnaire.get_assessments_for(AssignmentParticipant.find_by_parent_id(assignments(:assignment0)))
> > +      scores[questionnaire.symbol][:assessments] = questionnaire.get_metareviews_for(AssignmentParticipant.find_by_parent_id(assignments(:assignment0)))
>
> This unit test also errors when run on its own.
> NoMethodError: undefined method `get_metareviews_for' for
> #<ReviewQuestionnaire:0x10b14c2b8>
> I believe the method you should be calling is get_reviews_for by what you
> defined in the review_questionnaire controller
>
> —
> Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub<https://github.com/expertiza/expertiza/pull/260/files#r3766137>
> .
>