refactor(application): extract vacation management into application use-cases

Moves approve, reject, cancel, and request vacation business logic
out of the tRPC procedure layer into packages/application, matching
the pattern used by allocation use-cases.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
2026-04-09 17:11:37 +02:00
10 changed files with 523 additions and 274 deletions
@@ -312,6 +312,7 @@ describe("vacation router", () => {
it("logs and swallows async notification failures during approval", async () => {
vi.mocked(createNotification).mockRejectedValueOnce(new Error("notification down"));
const approvedVacation = { ...sampleVacation, status: VacationStatus.APPROVED };
const db = createVacationDb({
user: {
findUnique: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue({ id: "mgr_1", systemRole: "MANAGER" }),
@@ -332,11 +333,7 @@ describe("vacation router", () => {
...sampleVacation,
status: VacationStatus.PENDING,
}),
findUniqueOrThrow: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue({
...sampleVacation,
status: VacationStatus.APPROVED,
}),
updateMany: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue({ count: 1 }),
update: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue(approvedVacation),
},
});
@@ -361,6 +358,7 @@ describe("vacation router", () => {
it("logs and swallows webhook failures during approval", async () => {
vi.mocked(dispatchWebhooks).mockRejectedValueOnce(new Error("webhook down"));
const approvedVacation = { ...sampleVacation, status: VacationStatus.APPROVED };
const db = createVacationDb({
user: {
findUnique: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue({ id: "mgr_1", systemRole: "MANAGER" }),
@@ -381,11 +379,7 @@ describe("vacation router", () => {
...sampleVacation,
status: VacationStatus.PENDING,
}),
findUniqueOrThrow: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue({
...sampleVacation,
status: VacationStatus.APPROVED,
}),
updateMany: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue({ count: 1 }),
update: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue(approvedVacation),
},
});
@@ -899,8 +893,7 @@ describe("vacation router", () => {
const db = createVacationDb({
vacation: {
findUnique: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue(sampleVacation),
findUniqueOrThrow: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue(updatedVacation),
updateMany: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue({ count: 1 }),
update: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue(updatedVacation),
},
user: {
findUnique: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue({ id: "mgr_1" }),
@@ -914,7 +907,7 @@ describe("vacation router", () => {
const result = await caller.approve({ id: "vac_1" });
expect(result.status).toBe(VacationStatus.APPROVED);
expect(db.vacation.updateMany).toHaveBeenCalledWith(
expect(db.vacation.update).toHaveBeenCalledWith(
expect.objectContaining({
where: expect.objectContaining({ id: "vac_1" }),
data: expect.objectContaining({
@@ -1020,8 +1013,7 @@ describe("vacation router", () => {
const db = createVacationDb({
vacation: {
findUnique: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue(sampleVacation),
findUniqueOrThrow: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue(updatedVacation),
updateMany: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue({ count: 1 }),
update: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue(updatedVacation),
},
resource: {
findUnique: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue(null),
@@ -1032,7 +1024,7 @@ describe("vacation router", () => {
const result = await caller.reject({ id: "vac_1", rejectionReason: "Team conflict" });
expect(result.status).toBe(VacationStatus.REJECTED);
expect(db.vacation.updateMany).toHaveBeenCalledWith(
expect(db.vacation.update).toHaveBeenCalledWith(
expect.objectContaining({
where: expect.objectContaining({ id: "vac_1" }),
data: expect.objectContaining({