Skip to content

Conversation

@tylern4
Copy link
Member

@tylern4 tylern4 commented Feb 20, 2025

No description provided.

@tylern4 tylern4 requested a review from cjh1 February 20, 2025 21:21
Copy link
Collaborator

@cjh1 cjh1 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looking good, some inline comments. Happy to discuss in person.

source_uuid: str,
target_uuid: str,
source_dir: str,
target_dir: str,
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We should allow <Async>RemotePath to be passed here so it integrates nicely with the other parts of the API. I think its just a question of updating typing, but we should add a test as well.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Added in the typing here. The remote_file in the tests are <Async>RemotePath so it should be working as expected.

Copy link
Collaborator

@cjh1 cjh1 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@tylern4 Sorry for the delay! A few things to clean up and then I think we can get this released.

@tylern4
Copy link
Member Author

tylern4 commented Sep 19, 2025

@cjh1 I think this should be set.

I commented out a few integration tests that now fail because the status endpoint has changed. I think we'll need to do a real revamp of the status so I added an issue for it #102

I also ended up updating the python version to a minimum of 3.8 because of a few walrus operators that ruff found. Python 3.7 was EOL June 2023 so it's probably good not to support it anymore, we could also do the same for 3.8 which had it's EOL in October 2024 but at least the checks pass for 3.8 and the code should still work.

@cjh1
Copy link
Collaborator

cjh1 commented Sep 22, 2025

I commented out a few integration tests that now fail because the status endpoint has changed. I think we'll need to do a real revamp of the status so I added an issue for it #102

The plan was to maintain API compatibility, I ran our tests before things were deployed, what tests are failing?

@tylern4
Copy link
Member Author

tylern4 commented Sep 22, 2025

The /status/notes endpoint is still there but the data is gone. So the tests fail since the check is that the returned array has data in it, but now there is no data returned in the array.

$ curl -X 'GET' 'https://api.nersc.gov/api/v1.2/status/notes' -H 'accept: application/json'
[[]]

Copy link
Collaborator

@cjh1 cjh1 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, thanks for your persistence and changes!

@tylern4 tylern4 merged commit c4e498d into main Oct 12, 2025
8 checks passed
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.

3 participants