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

Skip to content

Conversation

@coverbeck
Copy link
Collaborator

@coverbeck coverbeck commented Jan 9, 2025

Description
We were creating a ResolvedImportBundle that didn't include existing resolvers.

The second parameter name in ResolvedImportBundle is newResolvers, which I had previously interpreted to mean any resolvers not already in the list of the resolvers. But Scala Lists are by default immutable, so I came to realize that
they wanted a new complete list of resolvers.

The :+ operand creates a new list from an existing list and an item.

Having all resolvers present makes it work; I don't exactly understand how Cromwell knows which of the resolvers to use, but it makes sense given the list is being passed around.

Tested manually using instructions in the GitHub issue. There should ideally still be a test for this. Denis added a test.

Review Instructions
Follow the instructions in #6061.

Issue
#6061
DOCK-2609

Security and Privacy

None

Please make sure that you've checked the following before submitting your pull request. Thanks!

  • Check that you pass the basic style checks and unit tests by running mvn clean install
  • Ensure that the PR targets the correct branch. Check the milestone or fix version of the ticket.
  • Follow the existing JPA patterns for queries, using named parameters, to avoid SQL injection
  • If you are changing dependencies, check the Snyk status check or the dashboard to ensure you are not introducing new high/critical vulnerabilities
  • Assume that inputs to the API can be malicious, and sanitize and/or check for Denial of Service type values, e.g., massive sizes
  • Do not serve user-uploaded binary images through the Dockstore API
  • Ensure that endpoints that only allow privileged access enforce that with the @RolesAllowed annotation
  • Do not create cookies, although this may change in the future
  • If this PR is for a user-facing feature, create and link a documentation ticket for this feature (usually in the same milestone as the linked issue). Style points if you create a documentation PR directly and link that instead.

We were creating a ResolvedImportBundle that didn't include existing
resolvers.
@coverbeck coverbeck requested a review from denis-yuen January 9, 2025 01:19
@coverbeck coverbeck self-assigned this Jan 9, 2025
@denis-yuen
Copy link
Member

denis-yuen commented Jan 9, 2025

(test failure looks like transient, or at least does not occur locally)

Read wrong test, fixed

Most of the new test code is in dockstore-testing/wdl-humanwgs@v0.11-no-submodule...dockstore-testing:wdl-humanwgs:no-submodules-https-import

@denis-yuen denis-yuen requested review from a team, hyunnaye and svonworl and removed request for a team January 9, 2025 16:44
@sonarqubecloud
Copy link

sonarqubecloud bot commented Jan 9, 2025

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 9, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 61.52%. Comparing base (92b8150) to head (0ace360).

❗ There is a different number of reports uploaded between BASE (92b8150) and HEAD (0ace360). Click for more details.

HEAD has 8 uploads less than BASE
Flag BASE (92b8150) HEAD (0ace360)
toolintegrationtests 2 0
unit-tests_and_non-confidential-tests 4 0
hoverflytests 1 0
bitbuckettests 1 0
Additional details and impacted files
@@                 Coverage Diff                  @@
##             hotfix/1.16.4    #6065       +/-   ##
====================================================
- Coverage            72.22%   61.52%   -10.70%     
+ Complexity            5280     4530      -750     
====================================================
  Files                  381      381               
  Lines                19800    19800               
  Branches              2044     2044               
====================================================
- Hits                 14300    12182     -2118     
- Misses                4531     6623     +2092     
- Partials               969      995       +26     
Flag Coverage Δ
bitbuckettests ?
hoverflytests ?
integrationtests 56.78% <100.00%> (ø)
toolintegrationtests ?
unit-tests_and_non-confidential-tests ?
workflowintegrationtests 38.05% <100.00%> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@denis-yuen denis-yuen deleted the branch hotfix/1.16.4 January 9, 2025 20:05
@denis-yuen denis-yuen closed this Jan 9, 2025
@denis-yuen denis-yuen deleted the feature/6061/wdlhttp branch January 9, 2025 20:33
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.

4 participants