MEN-8281 - types added to deployments slice

[mineralsfree]

No description provided.

[Copilot]

Pull Request Overview

This PR introduces enhanced type definitions across the deployments slice and related thunks with accompanying test updates to reflect these changes. Key updates include adding explicit types (e.g. using createAppAsyncThunk), updating test expectations (e.g. using d3 instead of d1 in some cases), and refining action payload typings to improve type safety and code clarity.

Reviewed Changes

Copilot reviewed 11 out of 11 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.

Show a summary per file

File	Description
tests/mockData.js	Added explicit undefined values for filter and group, and introduced a new deployment test entity “d3”.
packages/utils/src/helpers.test.ts	Updated expected sorting orders in tests to match new deployment IDs.
packages/store/src/storehooks.test.ts	Adjusted payloads in test actions to align with new types.
packages/store/src/store.ts	Added type annotations and integrated createAppAsyncThunk for improved async handling.
packages/store/src/organizationSlice/types.ts	Exported SortOptions for broader use.
packages/store/src/deploymentsSlice/thunks.ts	Refactored thunks with stronger type definitions and updated API calls with generic types.
packages/store/src/deploymentsSlice/thunks.test.ts	Updated tests to reflect changes in deployment ID usage and payload structure.
packages/store/src/deploymentsSlice/reducer.test.ts	Updated reducer tests to use action.type properties.
packages/store/src/deploymentsSlice/index.ts	Revised slice definitions with full TypeScript support and added explicit payload types.
packages/store/src/deploymentsSlice/constants.ts	Strengthened immutability hints by adding “as const” to constants.
packages/store/src/api/general-api.ts	Made minor adjustments to method signatures for consistency.

[mzedel]

feel free to take or leave these 👌

[mzedel]

Considering that the lowest common denominator might be { name: 'new Deployment', artifact_name: 'artifact' } + the devices get overridden in 2 of 3 cases and especially the hasNewRetryDefault would trigger different actions if retries would be set, I'd say:

Suggested change

	const newDeployment = {
	newDeployment: { name: 'new Deployment', artifact_name: 'artifact', devices: [Object.keys(defaultState.devices.byId)[0]] },
	hasNewRetryDefault: true
	};
	const newDeployment = { name: 'new Deployment', artifact_name: 'artifact' };

and then use that in the tests.

[mzedel]

Suggested change

	const trackDeploymentCreation = (totalDeploymentCount: number, hasDeployments: boolean, trial_expiration: string | null) => {
	const trackDeploymentCreation = (totalDeploymentCount: number, hasDeployments: boolean, trial_expiration?: string) => {

considering the type for trial_expiration in TenantV1

[mzedel]

Maybe

Suggested change

	devices: 'devices' in newDeployment && newDeployment.devices ? newDeployment.devices.map(id => ({ id, status: 'pending' })) : [],
	devices: newDeployment.hasOwnProperty('devices') ? newDeployment.devices.map(id => ({ id, status: 'pending' })) : [],

to stay consistent with similar checks in the codebase 👌.

[mineralsfree]

unfortunately, hasOwnProperty is not currently providing the type narrowing, so we would need to alter the interface of the function to something like this:

interface Object {
  hasOwnProperty<K extends PropertyKey>(key: K): this is Record<K, unknown>;
}

'prop' in obj is a current suggested type guard for typescript

I am ok with both approaches, but I would probably change it in a separate task (maybe the one for type improvement)

[mzedel]

😞 nah, no need to change this, but I would still consider the in usage risky/ a bad practice... and yes, that might be a good addition to the type improvement to ensure we don't rely on in if possible/ we have types used more broadly (and then maybe microsoft/TypeScript#44253 (comment) to not rely on it being a Record or unknown).

[mineralsfree]

Updated QA-1031 to include this

[mzedel]

Can you create a follow up task for this, please?

[mineralsfree]

https://northerntech.atlassian.net/browse/QA-1065