Conversation
af6f3ba to
bd442ab
Compare
|
Now fully functional, will update our records upon a successful insertion to Toolhub. I look forward to demo'ing this at our team meeting in half an hour. |
2883875 to
0c8efca
Compare
1d3d6c7 to
68f9c51
Compare
|
Another force push to deal with rebasing. Side note: |
903b3b5 to
1068177
Compare
|
To avoid major merge conflicts, I'm thinking it would probably be easiest to merge #29 first, then manually rebase this PR on top? What do you think @nbarnabee? |
I agree entirely! |
And the same is probably true of #27 |
1068177 to
a697315
Compare
|
To my utter astonishment, this still works perfectly and is ready for review. To test, run both the front and backend containers, and, from the toolhunt directory, upgrade and insert the mock data: Go to I've pared the mock data down to just what I need to test this route, as it all gets completely changed by #30 anyway. You can get "success" results by entering the following request along with the correct task id. Then you can check the demo server audit logs to see the result: https://toolhub-demo.wmcloud.org/api-docs#get-/api/auditlogs/ |
|
Recheck |
604c091 to
ab0fd00
Compare
|
Force pushed rebase from main. |
|
Now that the new mock data has been incorporated, my testing instructions above are out-of-date. Follow the db population instructions given in the README, which will produce plenty of sample incomplete tasks that you can test. |
Removed extraneous comments, a print() function and improved docstrings.
|
624a048 and 2797427 address changes suggested by @Damilare1 The main PUT route could definitely use some refactoring and better error handling. Once #31 is merged I will move many (most? all??) of these functions to ToolhubClient |
Damilare1
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for working on this. LGTM!
Have added a throughput for PUT requests, passing data received from the frontend to Toolhub server.