decidim-participatory_processes/app/forms/decidim/participatory_processes/admin/participatory_process_form.rb (1)

96-98: Same nil handling consideration as in AssemblyForm.

For consistency, if has_members being nil should also result in access_mode being set to :open, consider using unless has_members instead of == false.

♻️ Proposed fix to handle nil

 def ensure_access_mode_for_has_members
-  self.access_mode = :open if has_members == false
+  self.access_mode = :open unless has_members
 end

🤖 Prompt for AI Agents

Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

In
`@decidim-participatory_processes/app/forms/decidim/participatory_processes/admin/participatory_process_form.rb`
around lines 96 - 98, The method ensure_access_mode_for_has_members currently
does strict comparison (has_members == false) which ignores nil; change the
condition to treat nil as falsy (e.g., use unless has_members) so that when
has_members is nil or false you set self.access_mode = :open; update the logic
inside ensure_access_mode_for_has_members to use the falsy check and keep
references to access_mode and has_members unchanged.

decidim-participatory_processes/spec/forms/participatory_process_form_spec.rb (1)

130-138: Test coverage looks good, but consider adding a test for "restricted" access mode.

The test correctly validates that access_mode is reset to "open" when has_members is false. For completeness, consider adding a similar test case for when access_mode is "restricted" to ensure both non-open modes are properly reset.

🧪 Optional: Add test for restricted access mode

describe "access_mode reset when has_members is false" do
  context "when access_mode is transparent" do
    let(:access_mode) { "transparent" }
    let(:has_members) { false }

    it "resets access_mode to open" do
      subject.valid?
      expect(subject.access_mode).to eq("open")
    end
  end

  context "when access_mode is restricted" do
    let(:access_mode) { "restricted" }
    let(:has_members) { false }

    it "resets access_mode to open" do
      subject.valid?
      expect(subject.access_mode).to eq("open")
    end
  end
end

🤖 Prompt for AI Agents

Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

In
`@decidim-participatory_processes/spec/forms/participatory_process_form_spec.rb`
around lines 130 - 138, Add a parallel test for the "restricted" access_mode
inside the same describe block so both non-open modes are covered: ensure you
add a context or it-block that sets let(:access_mode) { "restricted" } and
let(:has_members) { false }, then call subject.valid? and
expect(subject.access_mode).to eq("open"); reference the existing describe
"access_mode reset when has_members is false", subject, access_mode, and
has_members to mirror the "transparent" case.

decidim-assemblies/app/forms/decidim/assemblies/admin/assembly_form.rb (1)

128-130: Consider handling nil case for has_members.

The condition has_members == false will not trigger when has_members is nil. If nil should be treated the same as false (i.e., no members), consider using !has_members or explicitly handling the nil case to ensure consistent behavior.

♻️ Proposed fix to handle nil

 def ensure_access_mode_for_has_members
-  self.access_mode = :open if has_members == false
+  self.access_mode = :open unless has_members
 end

🤖 Prompt for AI Agents

Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

In `@decidim-assemblies/app/forms/decidim/assemblies/admin/assembly_form.rb`
around lines 128 - 130, The method ensure_access_mode_for_has_members currently
sets access_mode only when has_members == false, which ignores nil; update the
condition in ensure_access_mode_for_has_members to treat nil as false (e.g., use
!has_members or has_members != true) so that when has_members is nil or false
the method sets self.access_mode = :open; reference
ensure_access_mode_for_has_members, has_members, and access_mode when making the
change.