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

Do not require stored workflow id for subworkflows #3723

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Mar 7, 2017

Conversation

Projects
None yet
3 participants
@guerler
Copy link
Contributor

commented Mar 7, 2017

Editing and saving an imported workflow containing subworkflows triggers an error. The subworkflow does not seem to have an associated stored_workflow. Is this here a reasonable fix? ping @jmchilton.

@guerler guerler added this to the 17.05 milestone Mar 7, 2017

@jmchilton

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Mar 7, 2017

Do you know when this was broken? I don't think this has always been broken right? I'd like to see the change and how it worked before to jog my memory.

@nsoranzo

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Mar 7, 2017

The original code was introduce in commit 157939a .

@jmchilton

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Mar 7, 2017

I missed the key word imported - I guess this may have been broken and just not tested.

@guerler

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Mar 7, 2017

This changed with using the update endpoint of the workflow api to save workflows. In contrast to the previous controller endpoint, the api endpoint completes the request by returning a dictionary instance of the updated workflow, see: https://github.com/galaxyproject/galaxy/blob/dev/lib/galaxy/webapps/galaxy/api/workflows.py#L356. This fails for subworkflows which are part of imported workflows due to the missing stored workflow resource. I wonder where/if the stored workflow id is used for subworkflows.

@guerler guerler added status/review and removed status/WIP labels Mar 7, 2017

@jmchilton jmchilton merged commit 9aa911d into galaxyproject:dev Mar 7, 2017

5 checks passed

api test Build finished. 263 tests run, 0 skipped, 0 failed.
Details
continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details
framework test Build finished. 140 tests run, 0 skipped, 0 failed.
Details
integration test Build finished. 24 tests run, 0 skipped, 0 failed.
Details
toolshed test Build finished. 580 tests run, 0 skipped, 0 failed.
Details
@jmchilton

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Mar 7, 2017

Thanks for the fix @guerler!

@guerler

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Mar 7, 2017

Awesome. Thx for the quick review.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.