fix(oonimkall): only set annotations on success #821
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This bug is one of these bugs that definitely help one to stay humble and focused on improving the codebase. Of course I <facepalmed> when I understood the root cause. We did not move the annotations below the `if` which is checking whether the measurement was successful when we refactored the codebase to support returning multiple measurements per run, which happened in #527. While I am not going to whip myself too much because of this, it's clearly a bummer that we didn't notice this bug back then. On top of this, it's also quite sad it took us so much time to notice that there was this bug inside the tree. The lesson (hopefully) learned is probably that we need to be more careful when we refactor and we should always ask the question of whether, not only we have tests, but whether these tests could maybe be improved to give us even more confidence about correctness. The reference issue is ooni/probe#2173.
|
Thanks, @aanorbel ! |
bassosimone
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 1, 2022
This commit backports 9b08dca from the master branch. Originaly commit message follows: - - - This bug is one of these bugs that definitely help one to stay humble and focused on improving the codebase. Of course I `<facepalmed>` when I understood the root cause. We did not move the annotations below the `if` which is checking whether the measurement was successful when we refactored the codebase to support returning multiple measurements per run, which happened in #527. While I am not going to whip myself too much because of this, it's clearly a bummer that we didn't notice this bug back then. On top of this, it's also quite sad it took us so much time to notice that there was this bug inside the tree. The lesson (hopefully) learned is probably that we need to be more careful when we refactor and we should always ask the question of whether, not only we have tests, but whether these tests could maybe be improved to give us even more confidence about correctness. The reference issue is ooni/probe#2173.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Checklist
Description
This bug is one of these bugs that definitely help one to stay
humble and focused on improving the codebase.
Of course I
<facepalmed>when I understood the root cause.We did not move the annotations below the
ifwhich is checkingwhether the measurement was successful when we refactored the
codebase to support returning multiple measurements per run, which
happened in #527.
While I am not going to whip myself too much because of this, it's
clearly a bummer that we didn't notice this bug back then. On top
of this, it's also quite sad it took us so much time to notice that
there was this bug inside the tree.
The lesson (hopefully) learned is probably that we need to be more
careful when we refactor and we should always ask the question of
whether, not only we have tests, but whether these tests could maybe
be improved to give us even more confidence about correctness.