Remove filetypes fq

[mccalluc]

Fix #2106?

[mccalluc]

3 fails, just because solr query doesn't match:

FAIL: test_generate_solr_params_for_user (user_files_manager.tests.UserFilesUtilsTests)
FAIL: test_generate_solr_params_for_assay_with_params (data_set_manager.tests.UtilitiesTest)
FAIL: test_generate_solr_params_no_params (data_set_manager.tests.UtilitiesTest)

I'll fix those.

[mccalluc]

One of two builds fails:

======================================================================
FAIL: test_get_dataset_expecting_analyses (core.tests.DataSetResourceTest)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/home/travis/build/refinery-platform/refinery-platform/refinery/core/tests.py", line 1991, in test_get_dataset_expecting_analyses
    self.assertEqual(data['analyses'][0]['name'], a2.name)
AssertionError: u'a1' != 'a2'

Haven't seen this before. Just try restarting...

[codecov-io]

Codecov Report

Merging #2288 into develop will increase coverage by 1.51%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop    #2288      +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage    50.37%   51.89%   +1.51%     
===========================================
  Files          377      377              
  Lines        26916    27765     +849     
  Branches      1241     1241              
===========================================
+ Hits         13560    14409     +849     
  Misses       13356    13356

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
refinery/data_set_manager/utils.py	76.1% <ø> (-0.05%)	⬇️
refinery/user_files_manager/tests.py	100% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
refinery/data_set_manager/tests.py	99.67% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
refinery/tool_manager/views.py	98.82% <0%> (-1.18%)	⬇️
refinery/tool_manager/tests.py	99.95% <0%> (+0.09%)	⬆️

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 20d41e2...db54bb0. Read the comment docs.

[scottx611x]

Was the consensus on this still that we weren't sure as to what the 0 Facet Value behavior in the Filebrowsers should be so theres no clear path to proceed?

[mccalluc]

I think that's where we left it... There are a couple ideas out there:

• Load up some data locally and see what it looks like with these changes.

but also:

• Maybe if we think it through, we'll realize that no amount of solr tweaking will give us the results we want, and it may require changes to the indexing.

[mccalluc]

Thinking a little more: The simplest thing is probably just not to index these documents in the first place... but still store the files, in case we want to reindex and make them visible?