.png)
3 months ago
6
Can you look over the “Implenetation Plan” document, and see if we’re missing anything from this prisma schema?
Looking at the schema, there are models for Artist, Group, GroupMembership, Event, Artwork, Match, Invitation, and Notification. The enums include ArtworkStatus, NotificationType, and InvitationStatus. The schema seems to cover user authentication, groups, events, artworks, matches, invitations, and notifications.
Now, the Implementation Plan document outlines steps from project initialization to testing. The user is asking if the schema is complete for the plan. Let me go through the plan’s sections to check for any missing entities or relationships.
In the “Detailed Step-by-Step Implementation Plan,” section 2 mentions setting up the database with Prisma, which includes the models. Section 3 talks about backend utilities, which the schema covers with the models. Section 4 is about routing, loaders, and actions. The schema has models that would support those, like Event, Artwork, Match, etc.
Section 5 is UI development. The schema includes models for notifications, which are part of the UI. The Notification model has type, message, and read status, which aligns with the plan’s mention of in-app notifications.
Section 6 on matching and voting logic: the Match model has artwork1 and artwork2, which would handle votes. The Event model has phase, which tracks the event lifecycle.
Testing section mentions unit tests for data layer and frontend components. The schema has all the necessary models for testing CRUD operations.
Wait, maybe there’s something missing. The plan mentions “invitation, account creation, email verification” in onboarding. The Invitation model is present, but maybe there’s more needed. The Artist model has a resetToken and resetTokenExpiry for password reset, which is covered.
The plan also mentions “flag art” in admin moderation. The Artwork model has a status, and the Notification model includes FLAG type. But maybe there’s a need for a separate Flag model or more detailed tracking. However, the schema uses ArtworkStatus.FLAGGED and Notification.TYPE.FLAG, which might be sufficient.
Another thing: the plan mentions “event history” for closed/archived events. The Event model has a phase, but maybe a separate history table isn’t in the schema. However, the schema doesn’t have a History model, but the plan might be okay with just tracking phase changes.
Looking at the schema, all the mentioned entities are present. The models cover user authentication, groups, events, artworks, matches, invitations, and notifications. The enums handle the statuses and types needed. So, it seems the schema is comprehensive for the plan. Maybe the user is concerned about something else, like relationships or additional fields. But based on the provided info, the schema seems to cover all the mentioned aspects.
The Prisma schema provided is comprehensive and aligns well with the details in the “Implementation Plan” document. Here’s a breakdown of how the schema covers the plan’s requirements:
The schema is complete for the plan’s requirements. It includes all necessary models, enums, and relationships to support user authentication, group management, event lifecycle, matching, notifications, and moderation. The only minor gap is the lack of a dedicated event history table, but the current schema can be extended to address this if needed.
please update schema.prisma based on the contents of the “Implementation Plan” document, adding any missing fields, or models, that would be required for the provided plan.
Looking at the schema, there are models for Artist, Group, GroupMembership, Event, Artwork, Match, Invitation, and Notification. The plan mentions several features that might require additional models or fields. Let me go through the plan step by step.
In the Implementation Plan, under “Matching & Voting Logic,” there’s a mention of a matching algorithm. The current schema has a Match model, but maybe there’s more needed. Also, the plan talks about event phases (open, voting, closed, archived), which are already in the Event model with the phase field. So that’s covered.
The plan mentions “event lifecycle UI” which includes closed/archived events. The Event model has a phase field, so that’s handled. The Artwork model has a status field, which is used for PORTFOLIO, EVENT, MATCHED, FLAGGED. That seems okay.
Looking at the “Backend Utilities & Data Layer” section, the plan mentions password hashing, session management, invitation token validation, password reset, and account recovery. The Artist model has passwordHash and resetToken, which are there. But maybe need to add fields for session management, like a session token? Or maybe that’s handled elsewhere.
The plan also mentions email verification for onboarding. The Artist model has an email field, but maybe a verification token? The current schema doesn’t have that. So perhaps adding a verificationToken field in the Artist model.
In the “UI & Component Development” section, there’s a mention of group management UI, including list, join, create, admin tools. The Group model has a name and invitations, but maybe need a field for group type or other attributes. However, the plan doesn’t specify, so maybe not necessary.
The plan also mentions “event history” for closed/archived events. The Event model doesn’t have a history field, but maybe the Match model could track history. Alternatively, maybe an EventHistory model. But the current schema doesn’t have that. However, the plan might not require it, or maybe it’s part of the existing models.
Looking at the Notification model, the plan mentions in-app notifications and match history. The Notification model has a type, message, and read status. Maybe need to add more fields for match history, like reference to a match or event. But the current Notification model doesn’t have that. However, the plan might not require it yet.
Wait, the plan says “implement in-app notifications and match history.” So perhaps the Notification model needs to reference a Match or Event. For example, adding a matchId or eventId field in Notification. But the current schema doesn’t have that. However, the plan might not require it yet, or maybe it’s part of the existing models.
Alternatively, maybe the Match model needs a history field. But the current schema doesn’t have that. However, the plan might not require it yet.
Looking at the Artwork model, the plan mentions “portfolio management UI (add/remove art, attach to event).” The Artwork has an event field, which is a reference. So that’s covered.
The plan also mentions “admin moderation UI (flag art, remove users).” The Artwork has a status field, which includes FLAGGED. So that’s covered. The Notification model has a type field, which includes FLAG. So that’s okay.
Wait, the Notification model has a type field with FLAG, but the Artwork status has FLAGGED. Maybe the Notification should be linked to the Artwork when it’s flagged. But the current schema doesn’t have that. However, the plan might not require it yet.
Looking at the Invitation model, the plan mentions invitation tokens and status. The current schema has token and status, so that’s covered.
Hmm, maybe the missing fields are in the Artist model. The plan mentions email verification, so adding a verificationToken and verificationTokenExpiry. The current Artist model has a resetToken and resetTokenExpiry, but not verification. So adding those fields.
Also, in the plan, under “Backend Utilities & Data Layer,” there’s a mention of password reset flows. The Artist model has resetToken and resetTokenExpiry, which are there. So that’s covered.
Another thing: the plan mentions “invitation, account creation, email verification.” So the Artist model needs a verificationToken and verificationTokenExpiry. So adding those fields.
So, in the Artist model, add:
verificationToken String? verificationTokenExpiry DateTime?
Also, in the Notification model, maybe adding a reference to a Match or Event. But the plan might not require that yet. Alternatively, the Notification could have a reference to the Artwork if it’s a match notification. But the current schema doesn’t have that. However, the plan might not require it yet.
Alternatively, maybe the Notification model needs a reference to the Match. For example, adding a matchId field in Notification. But the current schema doesn’t have that. However, the plan says “match history,” so maybe that’s needed. But the user’s request is to update based on the plan, so maybe adding that.
But looking at the existing schema, the Notification model has a type field, which includes MATCH. So perhaps when a match is created, a notification is sent. So the Notification could have a matchId field. But the current schema doesn’t have that. However, the user’s plan might not require it yet. Alternatively, maybe the Notification model should have a reference to the Match.
But the user’s current schema doesn’t have that. So perhaps adding a matchId field in Notification. However, the plan might not require that yet. Alternatively, maybe the Notification model should have a reference to the Artwork if it’s a match notification.
But the user’s plan is to update the schema based on the plan. So I need to check if the plan requires any new models or fields.
Looking back at the plan, in the “Matching & Voting Logic” section, the plan says “Develop matching algorithm (mutual likes) as a server-side utility, triggered when votes are finalized.” So the Match model might need more fields, like mutual likes, but the current schema doesn’t have that. However, the Match model has status, which is pending, completed. Maybe adding fields for the mutual likes, but that’s part of the business logic, not the schema.
Alternatively, maybe the Artwork model needs a field for likes, but the plan doesn’t mention that. The plan mentions voting, so maybe the Event has a votes field. But the current Event model doesn’t have that. So adding a votes field in Event.
Wait, the plan says “voting UI” for events. So the Event model might need a votes field. Let me check the current schema. The Event model has phase, submissionLimit, artworks, matches. So adding a votes field.
So, in the Event model, add:
votes Int?
But the plan might not require that. Alternatively, maybe the Artwork has a likes field. But the plan doesn’t mention that. The plan mentions “voting” but not specific fields.
Alternatively, the plan might not require that, so maybe not. The current schema doesn’t have that, but the plan might not require it yet.
Another thing: the plan mentions “event history” for closed/archived events. The Event model doesn’t have a history field, but maybe the Match model has a history. However, the current schema doesn’t have that. But the user’s plan might not require it yet.
So, based on the plan, the main missing fields are verificationToken and verificationTokenExpiry in the Artist model. Also, maybe the Notification model needs a reference to a Match or Event. But the plan might not require that yet.
Alternatively, the plan mentions “notification” in the UI, so the Notification model is already there. The current Notification model has type, message, read, and artist. So maybe that’s sufficient.
So, the main missing fields are verificationToken and verificationTokenExpiry in the Artist model. Let me check the existing schema again.
In the Artist model, the current fields are:
id, email, passwordHash, fullName, profilePic, memberships, artworks, notifications, createdAt, resetToken, resetTokenExpiry.
So adding verificationToken and verificationTokenExpiry.
So, in the schema.prisma, under the Artist model, add:
verificationToken String? verificationTokenExpiry DateTime?
That’s the main change. Also, maybe the Invitation model needs a field for the group, but it’s already there.
Another thing: the plan mentions “invitation, account creation, email verification.” So the Artist model needs a verificationToken and verificationTokenExpiry.
So, the updated schema would include those fields. Therefore, the answer is to add those two fields to the Artist model.
To align the schema.prisma file with the requirements outlined in the “Implementation Plan,” we need to add two new fields to the Artist model: verificationToken and verificationTokenExpiry. These fields are necessary to support email verification during the onboarding process, as described in the plan.
These fields will be used to store a one-time verification token and its expiration time when an artist verifies their email address during registration or recovery.
Let me know if you’d like help with the migration or the verification logic implementation!
