Skip to content
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

#2282 Fixed schema validation bug for federal awards section #2362

Merged

Conversation

sambodeme
Copy link
Contributor

@sambodeme sambodeme commented Oct 3, 2023

Description

PR checklist: submitters

  • Link to an issue if possible. If there’s no issue, describe what your branch does. Even if there is an issue, a brief description in the PR is still useful.
  • List any special steps reviewers have to follow to test the PR. For example, adding a local environment variable, creating a local test file, etc.
  • For extra credit, submit a screen recording like this one.
  • Make sure you’ve merged main into your branch shortly before creating the PR. (You should also be merging main into your branch regularly during development.)
  • Make sure that whatever feature you’re adding has tests that cover the feature. This includes test coverage to make sure that the previous workflow still works, if applicable.
  • Do manual testing locally. Our tests are not good enough yet to allow us to skip this step. If that’s not applicable for some reason, check this box.
  • Verify that no Git surgery was necessary, or, if it was necessary at any point, repeat the testing after it’s finished.
  • Once a PR is merged, keep an eye on it until it’s deployed to dev, and do enough testing on dev to verify that it deployed successfully, the feature works as expected, and the happy path for the broad feature area (such as submission) still works.

PR checklist: reviewers

  • Pull the branch to your local environment and run make docker-clean; make docker-first-run && docker compose up; then run docker compose exec web /bin/bash -c "python manage.py test"
  • Manually test out the changes locally, or check this box to verify that it wasn’t applicable in this case.
  • Check that the PR has appropriate tests. Look out for changes in HTML/JS/JSON Schema logic that may need to be captured in Python tests even though the logic isn’t in Python.
  • Verify that no Git surgery is necessary at any point (such as during a merge party), or, if it was, repeat the testing after it’s finished.

The larger the PR, the stricter we should be about these points.

@sambodeme sambodeme linked an issue Oct 3, 2023 that may be closed by this pull request
6 tasks
@sambodeme sambodeme temporarily deployed to dev October 3, 2023 02:08 — with GitHub Actions Inactive
@sambodeme sambodeme temporarily deployed to meta October 3, 2023 02:08 — with GitHub Actions Inactive
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Oct 3, 2023

Terraform plan for meta

No changes. Your infrastructure matches the configuration.
No changes. Your infrastructure matches the configuration.

Terraform has compared your real infrastructure against your configuration
and found no differences, so no changes are needed.

Warning: Argument is deprecated

  with module.s3-backups.cloudfoundry_service_instance.bucket,
  on /tmp/terraform-data-dir/modules/s3-backups/s3/main.tf line 14, in resource "cloudfoundry_service_instance" "bucket":
  14:   recursive_delete = var.recursive_delete

Since CF API v3, recursive delete is always done on the cloudcontroller side.
This will be removed in future releases

✅ Plan applied in Deploy to Development and Management Environment #257

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Oct 3, 2023

Terraform plan for dev

No changes. Your infrastructure matches the configuration.
No changes. Your infrastructure matches the configuration.

Terraform has compared your real infrastructure against your configuration
and found no differences, so no changes are needed.

Warning: Argument is deprecated

  with module.dev.module.database.cloudfoundry_service_instance.rds,
  on /tmp/terraform-data-dir/modules/dev.database/database/main.tf line 14, in resource "cloudfoundry_service_instance" "rds":
  14:   recursive_delete = var.recursive_delete

Since CF API v3, recursive delete is always done on the cloudcontroller side.
This will be removed in future releases

(and 2 more similar warnings elsewhere)

✅ Plan applied in Deploy to Development and Management Environment #257

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Oct 3, 2023

File Coverage Missing
All files 89%
api/serializers.py 90% 125-126 131 136
api/test_views.py 96% 105
api/uei.py 96% 17-18 107-108
api/views.py 97% 196-197 204-205 226 362-363
audit/excel.py 85% 402 418 424 429 434 456-457 469 546 548 550 552 554 710-711 720-726 736 756
audit/forms.py 56% 22-29
audit/intake_to_dissemination.py 92% 67-68 197-203 253
audit/models.py 84% 57 59 64 66 213 246 417 435-436 444 466 542-543 547 555 564 568 574 577-583
audit/test_commands.py 87%
audit/test_mixins.py 90% 112-113 117-119 184-185 189-191
audit/test_validators.py 95% 436 440 608-609 848 855 862 869
audit/utils.py 76% 13 21 38
audit/validators.py 96% 287-288 303-304 514-523
audit/views.py 42% 86-107 130-131 205-206 251-252 263-264 266-270 317-330 333-347 352-365 382-388 393-413 440-444 449-478 521-525 530-550 577-581 586-615 658-662 667-679 682-692 697-709 732-733 738-787 790-830 833-850
audit/cross_validation/additional_ueis.py 93% 33
audit/cross_validation/check_award_ref_declaration.py 90%
audit/cross_validation/check_award_reference_uniqueness.py 93%
audit/cross_validation/check_certifying_contacts.py 87%
audit/cross_validation/check_findings_count_consistency.py 91%
audit/cross_validation/check_ref_number_in_cap.py 90%
audit/cross_validation/check_ref_number_in_findings_text.py 90%
audit/cross_validation/errors.py 78% 30 65
audit/cross_validation/naming.py 68% 178-182
audit/cross_validation/submission_progress_check.py 85% 64 79-82
audit/cross_validation/tribal_data_sharing_consent.py 86% 20
audit/cross_validation/validate_general_information.py 93% 28-29
audit/fixtures/single_audit_checklist.py 79% 156 232-241
audit/management/commands/load_fixtures.py 46% 39-45
audit/viewlib/submission_progress_view.py 96% 158-159
audit/viewlib/upload_report_view.py 30% 32-35 44 91-115 118-186
cms/views.py 57% 11-16 29-30
config/urls.py 71% 87
djangooidc/backends.py 78% 32 57-63
djangooidc/exceptions.py 66% 19 21 23 28
djangooidc/oidc.py 16% 32-35 45-51 64-70 92-149 153-199 203-226 230-275 280-281 286
djangooidc/views.py 80% 22 43 114
djangooidc/tests/common.py 96%
report_submission/forms.py 92% 35
report_submission/views.py 76% 83 215-216 218 240-241 260-261 287-396 399-409
report_submission/templatetags/get_attr.py 76% 8 11-14 18
support/admin.py 49% 9-10 13 34 37 74 77 82 89-95 98-100 103-104 107-108
support/cog_over.py 90% 30-33 86 93 145
support/signals.py 66% 23-24 31-32
support/test_cog_over.py 98% 134-135 224
support/management/commands/seed_cog_baseline.py 98% 20-21
tools/update_program_data.py 89% 96
users/auth.py 95% 40-41
users/fixtures/user_fixtures.py 91%

Minimum allowed coverage is 90%

Generated by 🐒 cobertura-action against 33c0f4a

@sambodeme sambodeme temporarily deployed to dev October 3, 2023 15:20 — with GitHub Actions Inactive
@sambodeme sambodeme temporarily deployed to meta October 3, 2023 15:20 — with GitHub Actions Inactive
Copy link
Contributor

@tadhg-ohiggins tadhg-ohiggins left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Approved during merge mania™.

@tadhg-ohiggins tadhg-ohiggins added this pull request to the merge queue Oct 3, 2023
Merged via the queue into main with commit 97b63c5 Oct 3, 2023
14 checks passed
@tadhg-ohiggins tadhg-ohiggins deleted the 2282-hd-a-federal-awards-workbook-that-fails-validation branch October 3, 2023 20:26
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[HD]: A federal awards workbook that fails validation
2 participants