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

21331 Dissolutions Job - Implement stage 2 #2736

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Jun 7, 2024

Conversation

chenhongjing
Copy link
Collaborator

Issue #: /bcgov/entity#21331

Description of changes:

  • Implemented stage 2 for dissolutions job
  • Add unit tests
  • Misc updates

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that you can use, modify, copy, and redistribute this contribution, under the terms of the lear license (Apache 2.0).

@@ -39,7 +39,7 @@ clean-test: ## clean test files
build-req: clean ## Upgrade requirements
test -f venv/bin/activate || python3.8 -m venv $(CURRENT_ABS_DIR)/venv ;\
. venv/bin/activate ;\
pip install --upgrade pip ;\
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@chenhongjing chenhongjing Jun 4, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I reverted the changes in Makefile back to previous version because it resolved the ModuleNotFoundError: No module named 'involuntary_dissolutions' I got when running tests in local env. Also, I check that there was the same error for the last PR on dissolutions job.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hmm, weird. The --upgrade change was a workaround for a dependency error that was happening on my mac (and maybe Argus' mac too), but obviously we don't want it breaking the unit tests.

I've been messing around with this a bit to see if I can find a middle ground where the requirements get installed correctly and the unit tests still run. I've found that pip install pip==21.0 works for both cases but throws a bunch of deprecation warnings during the tests.

I plan to keep experimenting a bit but I will make the change in my PR if I find a version that works for both cases.

Copy link

gitguardian bot commented Jun 5, 2024

️✅ There are no secrets present in this pull request anymore.

If these secrets were true positive and are still valid, we highly recommend you to revoke them.
Once a secret has been leaked into a git repository, you should consider it compromised, even if it was deleted immediately.
Find here more information about risks.


🦉 GitGuardian detects secrets in your source code to help developers and security teams secure the modern development process. You are seeing this because you or someone else with access to this repository has authorized GitGuardian to scan your pull request.

Copy link
Collaborator

@leodube-aot leodube-aot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM!

Copy link

sonarqubecloud bot commented Jun 7, 2024

Quality Gate Failed Quality Gate failed

Failed conditions
6.9% Duplication on New Code (required ≤ 3%)

See analysis details on SonarCloud

@chenhongjing chenhongjing merged commit 7b365da into bcgov:main Jun 7, 2024
9 of 11 checks passed
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.

3 participants