-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 11
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
feat: add plan_only param to api and create /tags/import/plan endpoint [FC-0036] #130
feat: add plan_only param to api and create /tags/import/plan endpoint [FC-0036] #130
Conversation
Thanks for the pull request, @rpenido! Please note that it may take us up to several weeks or months to complete a review and merge your PR. Feel free to add as much of the following information to the ticket as you can:
All technical communication about the code itself will be done via the GitHub pull request interface. As a reminder, our process documentation is here. Please let us know once your PR is ready for our review and all tests are green. |
e0b37ae
to
1545e37
Compare
1545e37
to
7f953d8
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@rpenido Looks good 👍 When you fix the nits, will be ready for CC review
- I tested this: I read and check the tests
- I read through the code and considered the security, stability and performance implications of the changes.
- Includes tests for bugfixes and/or features added.
- Includes documentation
# Check if the taxonomy was not changed | ||
url = TAXONOMY_TAGS_URL.format(pk=self.taxonomy.id) | ||
response = self.client.get(url) | ||
tags = response.data["results"] | ||
assert len(tags) == len(self.old_tags) | ||
for i, tag in enumerate(tags): | ||
assert tag["value"] == self.old_tags[i].value |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Could you add this on a separate utility function? It is repeated in different tests.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
{"file": file}, | ||
format="multipart" | ||
) | ||
assert response.status_code == status.HTTP_200_OK |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@rpenido Is it possible to do more verifications here? Maybe verify that it does not return error messages and that it does return data
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Done e0fe6e8!
Hi @bradenmacdonald ! This is ready for CC review. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks great to me!
@rpenido 🎉 Your pull request was merged! Please take a moment to answer a two question survey so we can improve your experience in the future. |
Description
This PR adds a
plan_only
param to the API and creates a new REST endpoint to allow the frontend to query for an import plan without actually importing anything.More info
Part of:
Testing instructions
Private-ref: