✨ Increment api version #59
Conversation
| ) | ||
| from osparc_client.models import RunningState as TaskStates | ||
| from osparc_client.models import Solver, UserRoleEnum, UsersGroup, ValidationError | ||
|
|
||
| __all__ = [ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
MINOR: use tuple instead of list for all, i.e.
__all__ : tuple[str, ...] = ( "BodyUploadFileV0FilesContentPut", )
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sorry, I managed to fix it in __init__.py but not in models.py and api.py 🤦♂️. That's done now.
| "OnePageSolverPort", | ||
| "StudyPort", | ||
| "Study", | ||
| "LimitOffsetPageStudy", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
oh! it produces really ugly model names for the pagination. Will review that later :-)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Since we have anyway taken control over the user facing API by having our wrapper we could simply start wrapping these methods.
| } | ||
| "title": "osparc.io web API (dev)", | ||
| "description": "osparc-simcore public API specifications", | ||
| "version": "0.4.5-dev" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How would I know to what commit of the openapi-simcore vcs this OAS belongs?
OK so it is here that we know that it is not released, right? i.e. -dev
Should we add some info int he version? SEE https://regex101.com/r/Ly7O1x/3/
https://semver.org/#is-there-a-suggested-regular-expression-regex-to-check-a-semver-string
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It is a good question 🤔. I was thinking about questions closely related myself because I am more used to a tighter coupling between client and server (i.e. one where the versions have to match).
I think the point is that since the client and server are completely decoupled we should not be able to see that directly in the openapi.json. Instead we should request the openapi.json form the server and do a comparison. Hence, how about adding a test to the e2e which (through the client) downloads the openapi.json from the server and runs one of the openapi tools (e.g. the diff tool) to check that the client and server are really compatible?
This wouldn't check what I think you want to check (i.e. that all endpoints can be hit by our client), but for that I guess we have the tutorials.
What do you think?
| ) | ||
| from osparc_client.models import RunningState as TaskStates | ||
| from osparc_client.models import Solver, UserRoleEnum, UsersGroup, ValidationError | ||
|
|
||
| __all__ = [ |
clients/python/Makefile
Outdated
| @@ -98,16 +102,14 @@ pylint: _check_venv_active ## runs linter (only to check errors. SEE .pylintrc e | |||
| .PHONY: test-dev | |||
| test-dev: _check_venv_active ## runs tests during development | |||
| # runs tests for development (e.g w/ pdb) | |||
| pytest -vv --exitfirst --failed-first --durations=10 --pdb --ignore=$(ARTIFACTS_DIR)/client $(PYTHON_DIR) | |||
| python -m pytest -vv --exitfirst --failed-first --durations=10 --pdb $(PYTHON_DIR)/test/test_osparc | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
- Good move.
_check_venv_activeguaranteespythonbut notpytestexecutable! - TIP: expand options in multi-line
What do these changes do?
Update
openapi.jsonand expose new functionality. Also add some sanity checks to the tests.Related issue/s
ITISFoundation/osparc-issues#668
How to test