Stop mocking dataverse contentprovider test #1389
Closed
Conversation
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
As I was debugging jupyterhub#1388, I realized that PR actually broke the dataverse provider, but the existing test was mocking so much that we didn't actually catch it! IMO, since the point of contentproviders is to integrate with external content providers, they should be integration tests so we can catch issues with them more easily. Integration tests would have caught https://jupyter.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/103349-ask-anything/topic/Binder.20Dataverse.20error more cleanly than how it happened for example. This PR removes all mocks from the dataverse test, and we immediately benefit - it shows us that the dataverse provider *only* actually handles DOIs, and not direct URLs! So even though we technically had tests earlier that showed our dataverse provider supporting direct dataverse URLs, it simply was not true. So we actually catch the failure. I will try to see if we can use a demo or test instance for the fetch test though, so we don't screw up download stats even more for the existing test doi we use.
|
@pdurbin is there a different DOI we can use for the 'fetch' test that doesn't screw up your stats even more? :) |
for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci
This was referenced Dec 17, 2024
manics
reviewed
Dec 17, 2024
| from repo2docker.contentproviders import Dataverse | ||
|
|
||
| test_dv = Dataverse() | ||
| harvard_dv = next(_ for _ in test_dv.hosts if _["name"] == "Harvard Dataverse") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you add a comment explaining what this iterates through, and what we end up comparing in the test? Are the names Harvard Dataverse/CIMMYT Research Data considered immutable properties of the repository?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@manics I'll do so, although I didn't add these - they were already there in the existing file.
|
Closing in favor of #1390 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
As I was debugging #1388, I realized that PR actually broke the dataverse provider, but the existing test was mocking so much that we didn't actually catch it!
IMO, since the point of contentproviders is to integrate with external content providers, they should be integration tests so we can catch issues with them more easily. Integration tests would have caught https://jupyter.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/103349-ask-anything/topic/Binder.20Dataverse.20error more cleanly than how it happened for example.
It also immediately showed me that some of the results we were using to test were not accurate, and I've updated the test fixtures to match what we actually expect them to return.
I will try to see if we can use a demo or test instance for the fetch test though, so we don't screw up download stats even more for the existing test doi we use.