Currently, we don't have a test for Sentry. Unsure how to do this.
Also added a script, service and test workflow to help. (Also to learn about adding a script and service.)
2. Disabling the token timeout for now, to see if this corrects the issues Alex is having with lost work.
3. Raising more thoughtful error messages for unknown lookup options.
4. Providing better validation of default values and injecting the correct value for defaults related to enum lists of all types.
5. Bumping Spiffworkflow library which contains some better error messages and checks.
Still having issues where we try to eval an empty definition, not quite sure why there is a difference from what we had before. I may need to revert some of it and determine what is going on.
This is the first waypoint on a larger effort to make all of the 'special scripts' that currently require a shebang to be just another python function.
* The Task.title returned to the front end will now attempt to process the "display_name" property for dot-notation syntax, making it possible to use this for multi-instance tasks,
but will work in all cases where we want he title to change based on values in the data model.
* Fixing a bug the test_study_api where it wasn't updated when we made recent changes to the different states of a study.
*
Added a File class, that we wrap around the FileModel so the api endpoints don't change, but File no longer holds refences to versions or dates of the file_data model, we
figure this out based on a clean database structure.
The ApprovalFile is directly related to the file_data_model - so no chance that a reviewer would review the incorrect version of a file.py
Noticed that our FileType enum called "bpmn" "bpmm", hope this doesn't screw someone up.
Workflows are directly related to the data_models that create the workflow spec it needs. So the files should always be there. There are no more hashes, and thus no more hash errors where it can't find the files to rebuild the workflow.py
Not much to report here, other than I broke every single test in the system at one point. So I'm super concerned about this, and will be testing it a lot before creating the pull request.
From an API point of view you can do the following (and only the following)
/files?workflow_spec_id=x
* You can find all files associated with a workflow_spec_id, and add a file with a workflow_spec_id
/files?workflow_id=x
* You can find all files associated with a workflow_id, and add a file that is directly associated with the workflow
/files?workflow_id=x&form_field_key=y
* You can find all files associated with a form element on a running workflow, and add a new file.
Note: you can add multiple files to the same form_field_key, IF they have different file names. If the same name, the original file is archived,
and the new file takes its place.
The study endpoints always return a list of the file metadata associated with the study. Removed /studies-files, but there is an
endpoint called
/studies/all - that returns all the studies in the system, and does include their files.
On a deeper level:
The File model no longer contains:
- study_id,
- task_id,
- form_field_key
Instead, if the file is associated with workflow - then that is the one way it is connected to the study, and we use this relationship to find files for a study.
A file is never associated with a task_id, as these change when the workflow is reloaded.
The form_field_key must match the irb_doc_code, so when requesting files for a form field, we just look up the irb_doc_code.
Dan Funk
mike cullerton
Kelly McDonald
Aaron Louie
Carlos Lopez