Thanks to visit codestin.com
Credit goes to github.com

Skip to content

Conversation

forus
Copy link
Contributor

@forus forus commented May 8, 2025

Generating the downloadable files on the fly. See more details here https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SQ033yQUc9VJquIuHon1WXnrnaIwORi114Q0daXLrl4/edit?tab=t.0

Describe changes proposed in this pull request:

enable downloading studies via /export/study/{study id}.zip

only works when feature_study_export flag is on.

BE cBioPortal/cbioportal#11482

Checks

  • Has tests or has a separate issue that describes the types of test that should be created. If no test is included it should explicitly be mentioned in the PR why there is no test.
  • The commit log is comprehensible. It follows 7 rules of great commit messages. For most PRs a single commit should suffice, in some cases multiple topical commits can be useful. During review it is ok to see tiny commits (e.g. Fix reviewer comments), but right before the code gets merged to master or rc branch, any such commits should be squashed since they are useless to the other developers. Definitely avoid merge commits, use rebase instead.
  • Is this PR adding logic based on one or more clinical attributes? If yes, please make sure validation for this attribute is also present in the data validation / data loading layers (in backend repo) and documented in File-Formats Clinical data section!

Any screenshots or GIFs?

If this is a new visual feature please add a before/after screenshot or gif
here with e.g. Giphy CAPTURE or Peek

Notify reviewers

Read our Pull request merging
policy
. It can help to figure out who worked on the
file before you. Please use git blame <filename> to determine that
and notify them either through slack or by assigning them as a reviewer on the PR

@alisman
Copy link
Collaborator

alisman commented Jul 14, 2025

@forus i like the flag dynamic_study_export_enabled better than feature_study_export
otherwise this PR is fine

@forus
Copy link
Contributor Author

forus commented Jul 14, 2025

@forus i like the flag dynamic_study_export_enabled better than feature_study_export otherwise this PR is fine

@alisman I see your point. Just to clarify, the feature flag is named feature.study.export on the back-end and has already been merged into master.

The decision to use this naming convention feature.<section>.<sub-section> was made to help standardize how we name feature flags across the codebase. This approach was proposed by @haynescd as feedback to the BE PR.
@haynescd asked me to create a ticket to remind us to rename the remaining flags cBioPortal/cbioportal#11615

@alisman @haynescd Let me know if you'd like to revisit this convention or discuss alternatives.

@alisman
Copy link
Collaborator

alisman commented Jul 14, 2025

@forus ok! i understand now. Glad to some thought was put into it and we have a convention now.

@forus forus force-pushed the rfc95-study-download branch from 88e492d to 2bc80c5 Compare July 14, 2025 15:36
@forus forus added the feature label Jul 14, 2025
@forus forus force-pushed the rfc95-study-download branch from 2bc80c5 to df1d0b1 Compare July 14, 2025 19:04
@alisman alisman merged commit 1b57ce6 into master Jul 15, 2025
13 of 16 checks passed
@alisman alisman deleted the rfc95-study-download branch July 15, 2025 14:24
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants