Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 21.35%. Comparing base (01f8919) to head (1140947).

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##               main   #12978   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage     21.35%   21.35%           
  Complexity     9990     9990           
=========================================
  Files           275      275           
  Lines         37317    37317           
  Branches        505      505           
=========================================
  Hits           7969     7969           
  Misses        28847    28847           
  Partials        501      501           

Code looks good to me and should be merged on priority.

My suggestion for a follow-up PR - We should definitely prevent future contributors to hardcode the term in future. Could we add a linting rule to catch this? Somewhere in site/eslint.config.js perhaps??

Thanks for the review! That is a very good idea. We could definitely add a linting rule about this, just pattern match s** and f** and warn about it. I will add that to my notes of things to work on.

Code looks good to me and should be merged on priority.
My suggestion for a follow-up PR - We should definitely prevent future contributors to hardcode the term in future. Could we add a linting rule to catch this? Somewhere in site/eslint.config.js perhaps??

Thanks for the review! That is a very good idea. We could definitely add a linting rule about this, just pattern match s** and f** and warn about it. I will add that to my notes of things to work on.

Should we throw a warning or an error? I am afraid warning might go unnoticed. We must find a clever and a robust way to do so if we plan to throw error.

Code looks good to me and should be merged on priority.
My suggestion for a follow-up PR - We should definitely prevent future contributors to hardcode the term in future. Could we add a linting rule to catch this? Somewhere in site/eslint.config.js perhaps??

Thanks for the review! That is a very good idea. We could definitely add a linting rule about this, just pattern match s** and f** and warn about it. I will add that to my notes of things to work on.

Should we throw a warning or an error? I am afraid warning might go unnoticed. We must find a clever and a robust way to do so if we plan to throw error.

Sorry I wasn't clearer. What I meant to say is hardcoding the term should fail the Javascript Lint CI. If there was an eslint rule about it that would be the result, and of course if you ran eslint locally you would see the same thing.