fix: remove redundant AND

[hussamkhatib]

What does this PR do?

AND is unesscessary here as only I condition is provided inside it.

However the motivation before creating the PR was to fix

// Order is important to ensure that given a slug if there are duplicates, we choose the same event type consistently when showing in event-types list UI(in terms of ordering and disabled event types)
// TODO: If we can ensure that there are no duplicates for a [slug, userId] combination in existing data, this requirement might be avoided.

I find the comment bit misleading as there can be no duplicate combination for [slug,userId]. (schema.prisma)

model EventType{
...
  id                      Int                     @id @default(autoincrement())
  users                   User[]                  @relation("user_eventtype")
  @@unique([userId, slug])
}

Due to which I tried to convert
const eventTypes = await prisma.eventType.findMany({
to
const eventTypes = await prisma.eventType.findUnique({
as there exist only 1 such pair.
After some time I found out that it also returns true if user exists in the username is exist in users( see model EventType above)
Eg Alice and Bob both have a event-type with 15min as slug.
the row where Alice is the owner (the event-type created by her) has users: ["alice","Bob"] in column users( see model EventType above)
Current Behaviour: Navigating to /bob/15min is resulted in the event-type where bob is the owner.
Suppise If Bob does not have this event created , It will result to the one Alice created (as Bob is included in users column of Alice craeted event)

The problem:

• same link can be resolved in two different cases mentioned above.
• There can be better solution than findMany , as we just need 1 row.

The first problem is probably the expected behaviour.
For the second I though of doing one of the following

• split into two queries, if record found where userId in model EventType matches the id of the username provided in slug.Then return the result of this and skip the next one. The first condition fails then only perform next one.
• doing a prisma raw query that will do it in one sql statement.

If any of the above two sounds good, I will go ahead and include them or you can go ahead with merging the existing change if your happy with it.

Type of change

• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)

[vercel]

Someone is attempting to deploy a commit to the cal Team on Vercel.

A member of the Team first needs to authorize it.

[zomars]

Thank you for your contribution 🙏