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

Sk/extra cap references #3886

Merged
merged 38 commits into from
May 28, 2024
Merged

Sk/extra cap references #3886

merged 38 commits into from
May 28, 2024

Conversation

gsa-suk
Copy link
Contributor

@gsa-suk gsa-suk commented May 24, 2024

Closes: #3709, #3884

This PR handles invalid audits that have no findings / less findings in comparison to the captexts. These audits are flagged and allowed to migrate as-is.

Testing:

  1. Test with a failed audit: (dbkey = 105561, audit_year = 2019) if access to census data in Preview is available.
  • Run 'docker compose run --rm web python manage.py historic_data_migrator --years 'my_year' --dbkeys 'my_dbkey''
  • Verify that dissemination_captext contains the captexts from census eleccaptext.
  • Verify that dissemination_finding contains no findings.
  • Verify that cap_text content is in the invalid audit record in dissemination_invalidauditrecord table.
  1. Test by removing findings for an existing audit.
  • For an audit that has captexts in the census eleccaptext table,
  1. remove findings in the census elecauditfindings table.
  2. set FINDINGSCOUNT in elecaudits table to 0.
  3. remove finding texts in the elecfindingstext table.
  • Run 'docker compose run --rm web python manage.py historic_data_migrator --years 'my_year' --dbkeys 'my_dbkey''
  • Verify that dissemination_captext contains the captexts from census eleccaptext.
  • Verify that dissemination_finding contains no findings.
  • Verify that cap_text content is in the invalid audit record in dissemination_invalidauditrecord table.

PR checklist: submitters

  • Link to an issue if possible. If there’s no issue, describe what your branch does. Even if there is an issue, a brief description in the PR is still useful.
  • List any special steps reviewers have to follow to test the PR. For example, adding a local environment variable, creating a local test file, etc.
  • For extra credit, submit a screen recording like this one.
  • Make sure you’ve merged main into your branch shortly before creating the PR. (You should also be merging main into your branch regularly during development.)
  • Make sure you’ve accounted for any migrations. When you’re about to create the PR, bring up the application locally and then run git status | grep migrations. If there are any results, you probably need to add them to the branch for the PR. Your PR should have only one new migration file for each of the component apps, except in rare circumstances; you may need to delete some and re-run python manage.py makemigrations to reduce the number to one. (Also, unless in exceptional circumstances, your PR should not delete any migration files.)
  • Make sure that whatever feature you’re adding has tests that cover the feature. This includes test coverage to make sure that the previous workflow still works, if applicable.
  • Make sure the full-submission.cy.js Cypress test passes, if applicable.
  • Do manual testing locally. Our tests are not good enough yet to allow us to skip this step. If that’s not applicable for some reason, check this box.
  • Verify that no Git surgery was necessary, or, if it was necessary at any point, repeat the testing after it’s finished.
  • Once a PR is merged, keep an eye on it until it’s deployed to dev, and do enough testing on dev to verify that it deployed successfully, the feature works as expected, and the happy path for the broad feature area (such as submission) still works.

PR checklist: reviewers

  • Pull the branch to your local environment and run make docker-clean; make docker-first-run && docker compose up; then run docker compose exec web /bin/bash -c "python manage.py test"
  • Manually test out the changes locally, or check this box to verify that it wasn’t applicable in this case.
  • Check that the PR has appropriate tests. Look out for changes in HTML/JS/JSON Schema logic that may need to be captured in Python tests even though the logic isn’t in Python.
  • Verify that no Git surgery is necessary at any point (such as during a merge party), or, if it was, repeat the testing after it’s finished.

The larger the PR, the stricter we should be about these points.

@gsa-suk gsa-suk added this pull request to the merge queue May 28, 2024
Merged via the queue into main with commit 7395d19 May 28, 2024
12 checks passed
@gsa-suk gsa-suk deleted the sk/extra_cap_references branch May 28, 2024 21:47
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.

2 participants