-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 39
Commit
This commit does not belong to any branch on this repository, and may belong to a fork outside of the repository.
* Documentation improvements * Testing black linting * Testing black linting * reducing dependency on settings * reducing dependency on settings * reducing dependency on settings * Typo removal * configuring black linting * automatic blacking of the code * automatic blacking of the code * automatic blacking of the code * optimising imports * black * testing build action with v2 * reverted settings * Black shield added * Added accounting number to writers * Accounting number now appears in outgoing royalty statements, updated documentation * Updated releases.rst * Updated releases.rst and improved test coverage * Updated releases.rst and improved test coverage * Fixes related to writer.account_number * Fixes related to writer.account_number * Fixes related to writer.account_number * Fixes related to writer.account_number * Improved introduction * Improved introduction * Code complexity reduced to D * Code complexity in models.py reduced to C * Bumping versions of everything * replacing assert with proper exceptions * blacked * started work on DDEX ERN exports - DPID validation added * added added XML template and action, the work starts * removed API links to private artists, added artist to releases, etc. * fixed build script * blacked everything * Releases.txt extended with text about EBR. * CWR_CODE now defaults to "000", and default publisher IP to "P000001" * Lagunage code for docs set to "en" * updated README * Update README.rst * changed test CWR files to match the new formar * improving CC - no more Ds * documentation updates - QA * documentation updates - QA * work on EBR 4.2 * blacked * Procfile * EBR removed * fixed for merging
- Loading branch information
1 parent
cc57ef4
commit ae1fd48
Showing
35 changed files
with
899 additions
and
283 deletions.
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
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
Loading
Sorry, something went wrong. Reload?
Sorry, we cannot display this file.
Sorry, this file is invalid so it cannot be displayed.
Loading
Sorry, something went wrong. Reload?
Sorry, we cannot display this file.
Sorry, this file is invalid so it cannot be displayed.
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
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -17,6 +17,7 @@ DMP | |
introduction | ||
features | ||
support | ||
qa | ||
videos | ||
installation | ||
releases | ||
|
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
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
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
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,108 @@ | ||
Quality Assurance | ||
##################### | ||
|
||
This project is now over four years old and, as any continuously | ||
developed project, has legacy issues. If anyone tells you that their | ||
project has no legacy issues, they are either ignorant or lying. | ||
Probably both. | ||
|
||
Here is how issues are reduced, caught and fixed in this project. | ||
|
||
Test coverage, Continuous Integration, Continuous Deployment | ||
================================================================= | ||
|
||
Test Coverage | ||
++++++++++++++++++++++ | ||
|
||
For years, test coverage was around 99% (mostly functional tests), and | ||
the goal is to keep it over 99.5% (rounded to 100%) for major releases. | ||
|
||
Continuous Integration | ||
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ | ||
|
||
These tests are run on every push to the code repository, | ||
(together with code style validation). | ||
|
||
Continuous Deployment | ||
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ | ||
|
||
If tests pass, the code is automatically deployed. | ||
|
||
Manual Testing | ||
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ | ||
|
||
CD instance is used for creating screenshots for documentation | ||
and videos. Before each major release, all functionality is | ||
manually tested. | ||
|
||
Of course, there is a small chance that some edge case is not covered, | ||
and that someone will hit a bug in production, but it is reduced to the | ||
minimum. | ||
|
||
Code Style, Complexity and Maintainability | ||
======================================================== | ||
|
||
Some of these issues can be detected and/or measured, sometimes even | ||
fixed, with standard tools. Code style, complexity and maintainability | ||
are good examples. | ||
|
||
Code Style | ||
+++++++++++++++++ | ||
Code style in this project is current Black, with line length of 79 | ||
characters. This is validated on every push. | ||
|
||
Code Complexity | ||
++++++++++++++++++ | ||
|
||
Recently, code complexity has been improved. No code block has nor should | ||
have complexity over ``C (20)``. Average should remain around ``A (3.0)``. | ||
|
||
Code Maintainability | ||
+++++++++++++++++++++++++ | ||
|
||
Code maintainability is to be improved, currently 2 files have dead low | ||
index, due to their size. The goal is to have ``A`` across all files by | ||
the 23.4 release. | ||
|
||
Creativity of the one obvious way to do it | ||
===================================================================== | ||
|
||
All of these measures are about reducing the possibility of an issue | ||
arising, catching it when it does, and fixing it quickly without | ||
breaking something else. But, it has nothing to do with actual | ||
development of new features. | ||
|
||
Breaking the presumptions | ||
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ | ||
|
||
Until 2018, CWR was seen as something that only large | ||
publishers can use, due to it's complexity and expensive tools. | ||
Then DMP came out and shattered this, making CWR free and available | ||
to small publishers. In 2022, the mainstream belief in music | ||
publishing is that CWR is for everyone. | ||
|
||
Until 2020, most of the industry has believed that royalty management | ||
for music publishers is ... well, you know, only available to large | ||
publishers, due to complexity and price. | ||
|
||
Until 2022 ... data exchange between publishers and labels ... | ||
complex and expensive. | ||
|
||
QA without standards | ||
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ | ||
|
||
The question is how to assure quality if there are no standards and no | ||
expectations that actually apply to your project? | ||
(Except that it is impossible. Again.) | ||
|
||
Well, DMP fulfills all those that do apply (like CWR or DDEX EBR specs), | ||
validate everything can be validated (IPI, ISWC, DPID), except when | ||
breaking the rules is advantageous. (There is a reason why nearly everyone | ||
believed something was impossible, until someone broke some rule.) | ||
|
||
But, most of the rules are great, choosing which ones to break | ||
is a long process, in the three examples above, this choice took | ||
many years. | ||
|
||
And, if you break a rule, you must make a new one and document it really | ||
well. |
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.