fix: allow setting a blank org [IDE-1566]

[rrama]

Description

Previously you had to restart the IDE to go back to actually using the blank org (the user's preferred org from the web UI).

Relies on snyk/go-application-framework#518

Checklist

• Tests added and all succeed
• Regenerated mocks, etc. (make generate)
• N/A
• Linted (make lint-fix)
• README.md updated, if user-facing
• N/A
• License file updated, if new 3rd-party dependency is introduced
• N/A

[snyk-io]

✅ Snyk checks have passed. No issues have been found so far.

Status	Scanner	Critical	High	Medium	Low	Total (0)
✅	Open Source Security	0	0	0	0	0 issues
✅	Licenses	0	0	0	0	0 issues
✅	Code Security	0	0	0	0	0 issues

💻 Catch issues earlier using the plugins for VS Code, JetBrains IDEs, Visual Studio, and Eclipse.

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @rrama, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request addresses a bug where setting a blank organization in the IDE did not take immediate effect, requiring a restart. The changes ensure that the system correctly interprets and applies empty or whitespace organization inputs, allowing users to seamlessly revert to their default organization without needing to restart the IDE.

Highlights

• Organization Setting Logic: The updateOrganization function no longer ignores empty or whitespace organization settings, allowing the system to correctly process requests to set a blank organization.
• Test Coverage: Test cases have been updated and expanded to verify that providing an empty or whitespace organization string now correctly resets the organization to its default value.

🧠 New Feature in Public Preview: You can now enable Memory to help Gemini Code Assist learn from your team's feedback. This makes future code reviews more consistent and personalized to your project's style. Click here to enable Memory in your admin console.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request modifies the configuration update logic to allow setting a blank organization, which resets it to the user's default. The change in updateOrganization is correct and achieves this by removing the check for a non-empty organization string. The accompanying tests have been updated to verify this new behavior for both empty and whitespace strings. I've suggested a small refactoring in the test file to reduce code duplication by using a table-driven test, which will improve maintainability.

[gemini-code-assist]

These two test cases, blank organization resets to default organization and whitespace organization resets to default organization, contain a lot of duplicated setup code. To improve maintainability and reduce redundancy, consider refactoring them into a single table-driven test. This would make the test cleaner and easier to extend with more 'blank' value cases in the future.

	t.Run("setting a blank organization should reset to default", func(t *testing.T) {
		defaultOrgId := "00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000002"

		testCases := []struct {
			name     string
			settings types.Settings
		}{
			{
				name: "empty string",
				// Include another setting to avoid early return on empty settings struct
				settings: types.Settings{Organization: "", RiskScoreThreshold: utils.Ptr(100)},
			},
			{
				name:     "whitespace string",
				settings: types.Settings{Organization: " "},
			},
		}

		for _, tc := range testCases {
			t.Run(tc.name, func(t *testing.T) {
				c := testutil.UnitTest(t)
				di.TestInit(t)

				// Set an immutable default value to avoid API calls
				c.Engine().GetConfiguration().AddDefaultValue(configuration.DEFAULT_ORGANIZATION, configuration.ImmutableDefaultValueFunction(defaultOrgId))

				// Set to a specific org first
				c.SetOrganization(expectedOrgId)
				assert.Equal(t, expectedOrgId, c.Organization())

				// Update settings with blank org
				UpdateSettings(c, tc.settings, analytics.TriggerSourceTest)

				// Assert it resets to default
				assert.Equal(t, defaultOrgId, c.Organization())
			})
		}
	})

[rrama]

That's almost as many lines of code, so probably won't do.