-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 19
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
output folder DNE fix and audit log addition #847
Merged
Merged
Changes from 5 commits
Commits
Show all changes
9 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
fba74d7
output folder DNE fix and audit log addition
d89fb79
Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/develop' into feature/issue-846_…
2be886e
fix broken test
422f4ac
Merge branch 'bugfix/fix-develop' into feature/issue-846_output-folde…
4e25c2e
fix compilation error
7137615
Merge branch 'refs/heads/develop' into feature/issue-846_output-folde…
HEdingfield f80c8a1
Improve code clarity; minor refactoring.
HEdingfield e438e45
Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/develop' into feature/issue-846_…
567287f
lint
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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 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
Oops, something went wrong.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
All the stuff in these logs going to be duplicated in the "tabulate" log so, I'd argue that we shouldn't log in this case at all (which was an open question in #846). This would also allow us to remove the extra
prefix
field, which is a bonus IMO. Reasons:CC: @yezr to comment if necessary.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I agree with all your points, happy to defer to @yezr.
One benefit is that it may be confusing to have things outputted to the GUI log that are not in the audit log. But it's essentially duplicated / irrelevant info.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Speaking with @yezr:
I'll get to this!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm looking into this and it's not as straightforward as I had hoped because some CVRs are directories, not files.
Some considerations:
(1) is easier, but (2) seems safer. Still, it makes me want to move away from file hashing, and towards something a little cleaner.
So I'm leaning towards the latter: a checksum validation of the RCTab CVR. The downside is: (1) that means the file can never include timestamps, and (2) we can't inform the user which of their CVR sources has changed.
To sum up the four options:
Thoughts?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What a can of worms! I think we should kick the can of worms down the road and break this out into a separate issue, just submitting this PR as-is with the counting logging removed.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
created #853 to address stricter CVR comparisons outside of this PR