[REFACTOR] Css for NotFound.tsx

[hustlernik]

What kind of change does this PR introduce?

Refactor CSS for NotFound.tsx

Issue Number:

Fixes #3328

Does this PR introduce a breaking change?

No

Checklist

CodeRabbit AI Review

• I have reviewed and addressed all critical issues flagged by CodeRabbit AI
• I have implemented or provided justification for each non-critical suggestion
• I have documented my reasoning in the PR comments where CodeRabbit AI suggestions were not implemented

Test Coverage

• I have written tests for all new changes/features
• I have verified that test coverage meets or exceeds 95%
• I have run the test suite locally and all tests pass

Other information

Have you read the contributing guide?

Yes

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Style
  • Relocated styling for the Not Found component from a dedicated module to the global app styles
  • Updated styling to maintain consistent design and responsiveness
  • Adjusted media query styles for improved display across different screen sizes

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

This pull request focuses on refactoring the CSS for the NotFound component by removing the NotFound.module.css file and migrating its styles to the global src/style/app.module.css file. The changes involve updating the import statement in the NotFound.tsx component to reference the new global CSS file and consolidating the component's styles into the centralized stylesheet.

Changes

File	Change Summary
src/components/NotFound/NotFound.module.css	Deleted CSS module file
src/components/NotFound/NotFound.tsx	Updated import statement from local CSS module to global app.module.css
src/style/app.module.css	Added .section and .error classes for NotFound component styling

Assessment against linked issues

Objective	Addressed	Explanation
Streamline CSS into a single global file [#3328]	✅
Delete CSS files in the component path [#3328]	✅
Use variable names describing function over color [#3328]	❓	Need to verify color variable usage
Remove HTML color code references [#3328]	❓	Need to verify color code usage

Possibly related issues

• Refactor CSS files in src/screens/PageNotFound #2524: Refactoring CSS files in src/screens/PageNotFound, which follows a similar pattern of consolidating CSS
• Refactor CSS files in src/screens/ForgotPassword #2506: Refactoring CSS files in src/screens/ForgotPassword, part of the broader CSS streamlining effort
• Refactor CSS files in src/screens/Requests #2525: Refactoring CSS files in src/screens/Requests, aligning with the global CSS strategy

Possibly related PRs

• Refactor CSS for LeftDrawerOrg #3131: Refactoring CSS by consolidating styles into a global file
• refactor CSS src/components/EventRegistrantsModal #3383: Moving styles from EventRegistrantsModal.module.css to app.module.css
• Fixes #3343 added styles from Loader.module.css to a global css file app.module.css #3398: Consolidating styles from Loader.module.css into app.module.css

Suggested reviewers

• palisadoes

Poem

🐰 In the realm of styles so bright,
CSS modules take flight!
From scattered files to one global home,
Our code now elegantly roams.
Refactoring with rabbit-like grace! 🎨

---

📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 6af199a and cef099c.

📒 Files selected for processing (3)

• src/components/NotFound/NotFound.module.css (0 hunks)
• src/components/NotFound/NotFound.tsx (1 hunks)
• src/style/app.module.css (1 hunks)

💤 Files with no reviewable changes (1)

• src/components/NotFound/NotFound.module.css

✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)

• src/components/NotFound/NotFound.tsx

🧰 Additional context used

📓 Learnings (1)

src/style/app.module.css (1)

undefined

<retrieved_learning>
Learnt from: mandeepnh5
PR: #2536
File: src/style/app.module.css:564-577
Timestamp: 2024-12-01T10:46:49.756Z
Learning: The notFound class is used in the NotFound component, whereas the PageNotFound page has its own styles. It's important to distinguish between them to avoid confusion.
</retrieved_learning>

⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (1)

• GitHub Check: Test Application

🔇 Additional comments (4)

src/style/app.module.css (4)

9104-9105: LGTM! Clear section separation using comments.

The comment clearly indicates the start of NotFound component styles.

---

9107-9113: LGTM! Well-structured flex container.

The .section class uses flexbox to center its content both vertically and horizontally. The implementation is clean and follows best practices.

---

9115-9119: LGTM! Clear error message styling.

The .error class defines appropriate font size and weight for error messages.

---

9120-9128: LGTM! Responsive design implementation.

The media query adjusts styles for screens between 440px and 570px, providing a better user experience on smaller devices.

---

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

• Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
  • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
  • Generate unit testing code for this file.
  • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
• Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
  • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
• PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
  • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
  • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
  • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

• @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
• @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
• @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
• @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
• @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
• @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR. (Beta)
• @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
• @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
• @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

• Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
• Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
• Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

Documentation and Community

• Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
• Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
• Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

[github-actions]

Our Pull Request Approval Process

Thanks for contributing!

Testing Your Code

Remember, your PRs won't be reviewed until these criteria are met:

1. We don't merge PRs with poor code quality.
   1. Follow coding best practices such that CodeRabbit.ai approves your PR.
2. We don't merge PRs with failed tests.
   1. When tests fail, click on the Details link to learn more.
   2. Write sufficient tests for your changes (CodeCov Patch Test). Your testing level must be better than the target threshold of the repository
   3. Tests may fail if you edit sensitive files. Ask to add the ignore-sensitive-files-pr label if the edits are necessary.
3. We cannot merge PRs with conflicting files. These must be fixed.

Our policies make our code better.

Reviewers

Do not assign reviewers. Our Queue Monitors will review your PR and assign them.
When your PR has been assigned reviewers contact them to get your code reviewed and approved via:

1. comments in this PR or
2. our slack channel

Reviewing Your Code

Your reviewer(s) will have the following roles:

1. arbitrators of future discussions with other contributors about the validity of your changes
2. point of contact for evaluating the validity of your work
3. person who verifies matching issues by others that should be closed.
4. person who gives general guidance in fixing your tests

CONTRIBUTING.md

Read our CONTRIBUTING.md file. Most importantly:

1. PRs with issues not assigned to you will be closed by the reviewer
2. Fix the first comment in the PR so that each issue listed automatically closes

Other

1. 🎯 Please be considerate of our volunteers' time. Contacting the person who assigned the reviewers is not advised unless they ask for your input. Do not @ the person who did the assignment otherwise.
2. Read the CONTRIBUTING.md file make

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 89.22%. Comparing base (6af199a) to head (cef099c).
Report is 6 commits behind head on develop-postgres.

Additional details and impacted files

@@                  Coverage Diff                  @@
##           develop-postgres    #3458       +/-   ##
=====================================================
+ Coverage              2.26%   89.22%   +86.95%     
=====================================================
  Files                   316      338       +22     
  Lines                  8249     8630      +381     
  Branches               1880     1926       +46     
=====================================================
+ Hits                    187     7700     +7513     
+ Misses                 8050      652     -7398     
- Partials                 12      278      +266     

Flag	Coverage Δ
combined	89.22% <ø> (?)
jest	2.26% <ø> (?)
vitest	89.22% <ø> (?)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.