MaxFrank
August 19, 2025, 1:36pm
1
Hello all!
I am requesting a rights expansions to the edx-platform repository. This is to work on some of the components that my team maintains, such as the legacy learner dashboards , the credentials app , the learner home backend , and user API .
We actually have a GH team set up for this but it appears I was never added to it: Sign in to GitHub · GitHub
By being added to that group, I should have the permissions I need to facilitate my work.
Thank you for your consideration!
Comment period: 2025-08-19 to 2025-09-02
1 Like
kmccormick
August 19, 2025, 2:08pm
2
Hey Max, I know that you and Jason have each done a lot of work in edx-platform. Could you share links to some of your PRs to help the CCs vote on this?
MaxFrank
August 19, 2025, 3:36pm
3
Absolutely! Talk about a trip down memory lane!
One of these goes back to 2022
master ← mfrank/update-cert-reqs
opened 06:24PM - 15 Sep 22 UTC
## Description
This pull request updates two ADRs that define requirements a … learner must meet to receive a certificate. We no longer require learners to have an unexpired and approved ID verification. We are supporting [Name Affirmation](https://github.com/edx/edx-name-affirmation) to verify which name a user would like on their certificate. ID verification can still be enabled through a WaffleFlag.
JIRA: https://2u-internal.atlassian.net/browse/APER-1969
master ← mfrank/remove-mock-cross-product-recs
opened 04:57PM - 05 Mar 25 UTC
## Description
This removes cross product recommendation keys from mock data.… The learner recommendations app was [removed from this repo in September 2023](https://github.com/openedx/edx-platform/pull/33782).
This shouldn't have an affect on operators as the functionality is not utilized in any open source code.
master ← mfrank/remove-algoliasearch-package
opened 01:58PM - 18 Mar 25 UTC
## Description
Removes the algoliasearch package and addresses issue https://… github.com/openedx/edx-platform/issues/35334. The issue calls out a private plugin that uses this package but there doesn't appear to be any other dependency on this package in edx-platform so it has been removed.
After removing the dependency, I ran `make upgrade-package package=algoliasearch`.
master ← mfrank/change-confirmation-email-variable
opened 12:33AM - 29 May 25 UTC
## Description
This changes the Learner Home backend to use `SEND_ACTIVATION_… EMAIL_URL` instead of `ACTIVATION_EMAIL_SUPPORT_LINK` when preparing the init call.
For context, the `SEND_ACTIVATION_EMAIL_URL` is used by the [Learner Dashboard frontend to make a POST](https://github.com/openedx/frontend-app-learner-dashboard/blob/master/src/hooks/api.js#L95-L98) request that will trigger a confirmation email to be sent to learners who have not activated their account yet. The `ACTIVATION_EMAIL_SUPPORT_LINK` is used throughout the platform as a way to send learners to a support page ([example #1](https://github.com/openedx/edx-platform/blob/c2eb913dcb54c513b12278a5df765bd837681cee/common/djangoapps/student/views/management.py#L579-L590) [example #2](https://github.com/openedx/edx-platform/blob/c2eb913dcb54c513b12278a5df765bd837681cee/common/djangoapps/student/tests/test_email.py#L114-L116)). Whereas, the Learner Dashboard actually intends to trigger the email using an [endpoint](https://github.com/openedx/edx-platform/blob/489385e186d57a8d53b02c737ee33376f013a77c/openedx/core/djangoapps/user_authn/api/views.py#L118-L141).
With this in mind, it feels appropriate to instantiate a new variable for the purposes of sending the activation email. This allows the `ACTIVATION_EMAIL_SUPPORT_LINK` to continue to serve it's purpose.
master ← mfrank/add-oel-publishing-dep-contentstore-migration-0010
opened 06:12PM - 26 Jun 25 UTC
## Description
While running migrations for the `contentstore` app, I encount… ered an error in `0010_container_link_models.py`:
```py
ValueError: The field contentstore.ContainerLink.upstream_container was declared with a lazy reference
to 'oel_publishing.container', but app 'oel_publishing' doesn't provide model 'container'.
```
After some digging around, it was discovered that [a migration in the `oel_publishing` app](https://github.com/openedx/openedx-learning/blob/831b0def8fdf14373b3cdb1f2973ad16d1fd8ab8/openedx_learning/apps/authoring/publishing/migrations/0003_containers.py) that added the `container` model had not been run, hence the error.
After adding `('oel_publishing', '0003_containers')` to the dependency array for 0010, the migrations all ran without issue.
This PR simply adds that dependency to the array. This change does not affect what the 0010 migration does, it will only have an impact on the order in which the migrations are run.
1 Like
TyHob
August 19, 2025, 7:19pm
4
Hi Max! Can you please start a separate post for Jason? It will get hard to tell your contributions and voting apart here.
Otherwise it’s a
MaxFrank
September 3, 2025, 4:08pm
5
The comment period is up but there haven’t been many approvals. Should I give it more time or does this mean the request won’t pass? @TyHob
TyHob
September 3, 2025, 5:46pm
6
Hey Max, you can give it another week and we’ll try to get more eyes on it.
deborahgu
September 3, 2025, 7:21pm
8
kmccormick
September 8, 2025, 2:30pm
9
Hey @MaxFrank , is there a larger / more in-depth backend contribution you can link to? Doesn’t need to be edx-platform necessarily.
MaxFrank
September 9, 2025, 5:43pm
10
Sure! Here’s one for credentials:
master ← mfrank/adding-rest-api
opened 07:07PM - 14 Jul 22 UTC
This PR is a part of a larger task for migrating to the new Learner Record MFE. …
An `api.py` file has been created in the `records` directory to house re-usable functions employed by both the REST API and legacy frontend. The `get_record_data` function has been moved to `api.py` from `credentials/apps/records/views.py`.
The REST API has been refactored to use a ViewSet instead of the APIView it employed previously. A router has also been added to `urls.py` in the `rest-api/v1` directory as well as a serializer called `ProgramRecordSerializer`.
Unit tests have been added to test any new code. There are comments detailing some of my thought process but also posing questions for anyone who is reviewing. This is still a WIP as I am anticipating the need to address some general housekeeping issues or perhaps add more tests.
kmccormick
September 12, 2025, 6:07pm
11
Nice, thanks. It’s a yes from me
TyHob
September 22, 2025, 7:42pm
13
With 5 votes and no concerns this has passed!
from me, Max has been doing a lot of great work!