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

State Pension Through Partner's National Insurance Record #2432

Merged
merged 11 commits into from
Apr 5, 2016

Conversation

ikennaokpala
Copy link
Contributor

Trello card: https://trello.com/c/MmtMrIOX/81-6-april-smart-answer-changes-your-partner-s-national-insurance-record-and-your-state-pension

Preview link: https://smart-answers-pr-2432.herokuapp.com/state-pension-through-partner/y/
URL on GOV.UK: https://www.gov.uk//state-pension-through-partner/y)

Change to the inputs and outcomes for state pension through partner

  • Remove option B and C in question 1 (i.e will_marry_before_specific_date and will_marry_after_specific_date options)
  • Content changes to questions 2 and 3
  • Replace first sentence in partner state pension
  • Content additions and changes to outcome 1,2,3,5,6,8a,9,10
  • Creation of new outcome 8b
  • Add state pension rates for 2016
  • Changed test narratives, description and remove duplications
  • Adjustment to flow for widowed male

Factcheck For Married, before, before

Expected changes

Before

screen shot 2016-04-05 at 10 29 22

After

screen shot 2016-04-05 at 17 08 25

Factcheck For Married, before, after

Expected changes

Before

screen shot 2016-04-05 at 10 31 38

After

screen shot 2016-04-05 at 10 31 42

@ikennaokpala ikennaokpala force-pushed the partners-national-insurance-record branch 2 times, most recently from b39ee45 to 0cf6ca3 Compare April 5, 2016 11:50
Ikenna Okpala added 7 commits April 5, 2016 12:59
Removes options B and C (i.e will_marry_before_specific_date and
will_marry_after_specific_date options respectively) from question 1

Change here were requested by Content team as part of update in preparation
new financial year 6 Apr 2016.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IKj2pFp9RFgcggxjtLUVwmUItQU23JtwlUBfjnkwuqE
This commit defines the state pension rate for 2016 financial year
These are content changes made upon request from the Content team
Content additions and changes to outcome 1,2,3,5,6,8a,9,10

Creation of new outcome 8b

Content change made to question in accordance with the google document
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IKj2pFp9RFgcggxjtLUVwmUItQU23JtwlUBfjnkwuqE
Adjustment to flow for widowed male

Changed test narratives, description and remove duplications
found in the responses and expected result yaml file.
This commit comprise of content changes made upon request
from the content team after factcheck from DWP
This commit ensures that trailing zero appears in the outcomes
@ikennaokpala ikennaokpala force-pushed the partners-national-insurance-record branch from 0cf6ca3 to b9c0e40 Compare April 5, 2016 11:59
@leenagupte leenagupte self-assigned this Apr 5, 2016
@leenagupte leenagupte added the LGTM label Apr 5, 2016
@leenagupte leenagupte removed their assignment Apr 5, 2016
@ikennaokpala ikennaokpala force-pushed the partners-national-insurance-record branch from 6d83e4a to 6e36ed7 Compare April 5, 2016 15:54
@ikennaokpala ikennaokpala merged commit c1f9ed6 into master Apr 5, 2016
@ikennaokpala ikennaokpala deleted the partners-national-insurance-record branch April 5, 2016 15:59
floehopper added a commit that referenced this pull request May 12, 2016
These changes should have been made in #2432.

Also updated regression test artefacts in the light of these changes and then
updated regression test checksums, because all the regression tests are now
passing.
floehopper added a commit that referenced this pull request May 12, 2016
These changes should have been made in #2432.

Also updated regression test artefacts in the light of these changes and then
updated regression test checksums, because all the regression tests are now
passing.
@floehopper
Copy link
Contributor

@ikennaokpala: Can you check that I'm right in thinking the changes in this commit (part of #2524) should've been made in this (old) PR? Do the changes make sense to you?

@floehopper
Copy link
Contributor

I have received confirmation that the relevant changes in #2524 are correct.

floehopper added a commit that referenced this pull request May 13, 2016
These changes should have been made in #2432.

Also updated regression test artefacts in the light of these changes and then
updated regression test checksums, because all the regression tests are now
passing.
floehopper added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 27, 2016
I believe this Smart Answer was updated for 6th April, 2016 in #2432 & #2446.
And in any case it is now well after 6th April, 2016, so this comment doesn't
seem to be helping!
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants