Storage merge requestshttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/storage/-/merge_requests2023-12-12T10:20:11Zhttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/storage/-/merge_requests/800[MSOSDU-1787]: Increase code coverage percentage2023-12-12T10:20:11ZDeepa Kumari[MSOSDU-1787]: Increase code coverage percentageCode coverage increment for storage azure:
* Issue Reference: https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/ci-cd-pipelines/-/issues/40
* Added `apache-maven-plugin` dependency to fix the jacoco report generation
* Added exclusions for ...Code coverage increment for storage azure:
* Issue Reference: https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/ci-cd-pipelines/-/issues/40
* Added `apache-maven-plugin` dependency to fix the jacoco report generation
* Added exclusions for the classes that were not required to be evaluated for tests coverage report in maven plugin exclusion list
* Generated Code Coverage [Report](https://osdu.pages.opengroup.org/-/platform/system/storage/-/jobs/2447260/artifacts/provider/storage-azure/target/site/jacoco/index.html)
**Initial code coverage: 16%**
**Current code coverage: 67%**M22 - Release 0.25Deepa KumariDeepa Kumarihttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/storage/-/merge_requests/735added int test case for users.data.root(GONRG-7444)2023-07-24T15:18:43ZRustam Lotsmanenko (EPAM)rustam_lotsmanenko@epam.comadded int test case for users.data.root(GONRG-7444)## Type of change
- [x] Tests.
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
Issue: https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/storage/-/issues/177
## Does this introduce a change in the core ...## Type of change
- [x] Tests.
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
Issue: https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/storage/-/issues/177
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provider implementation, if so which cloud?
- [x] Common code
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
- [NO]
## What is the current behavior?
`users.data.root` is not tested in E2E scenarios.
## What is the new/expected behavior?
During testing, a new `data` group is created, and a record with that group in ACL is generated. Users with the `users.data.root` group can fetch that record even though they haven't been explicitly added to that group.
## Have you added/updated Unit Tests and Integration Tests?
Yes
## Any other useful information
The CI/CD configuration needs to be updated, and the core classes should be implemented to utilize the new test case.M20 - Release 0.23Rustam Lotsmanenko (EPAM)rustam_lotsmanenko@epam.comRustam Lotsmanenko (EPAM)rustam_lotsmanenko@epam.comhttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/storage/-/merge_requests/660updating version of core-lib-azure2023-03-30T08:52:54ZAshwani Pandeyupdating version of core-lib-azureThis MR creating for fixing storage service build is failing in osdu devops cluster when IBM devops team doing testing with release/0.18 code.
IBM devops team reported that Storage service build is failing in devops cluster when release...This MR creating for fixing storage service build is failing in osdu devops cluster when IBM devops team doing testing with release/0.18 code.
IBM devops team reported that Storage service build is failing in devops cluster when release code is pointing to 0.18 release.
Failing due to below reason:
[ERROR] Non-resolvable import POM: Could not transfer artifact org.opengroup.osdu:os-core-common:pom:0.18.0-SNAPSHOT from/to ${repo.releases.id} (${repo.releases.url}): Cannot access ${repo.releases.url} with type default using the available connector factories: BasicRepositoryConnectorFactory @ org.opengroup.osdu:core-lib-azure:0.18.0-recordsevent, /tmp/artifacts/m2/org/opengroup/osdu/**core-lib-azure/0.18.0-recordsevent/core-lib-azure-0.18.0-recordsevent.pom**, line 94, column 19
To fix this issue I have upgraded osdu:core-lib-azure version to 0.18.1 :
`<osdu.corelibazure.version>0.18.1</osdu.corelibazure.version>`
For reference, please see on changes.M15 - Release 0.18Ashwani PandeyAshwani Pandeyhttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/storage/-/merge_requests/531Correct the attribute name to "PreloadFilePath" for os-storage2023-08-18T22:20:52ZXiangliang MengCorrect the attribute name to "PreloadFilePath" for os-storage# Merge request template# Merge request templateM15 - Release 0.18Okoun-Ola Fabien HouetoXiangliang MengOkoun-Ola Fabien Houetohttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/storage/-/merge_requests/528Cherry-pick 'Added valid access token for test case inputs' into release/0.172022-10-07T07:51:45ZDavid Diederichd.diederich@opengroup.orgCherry-pick 'Added valid access token for test case inputs' into release/0.17**Original MR**: !508
### This MR is a Cherry Pick into a Release Branch.
After the release branch is first created, any subsequent changes use this process to update the release (often resulting in a new patch tag) without incorporati...**Original MR**: !508
### This MR is a Cherry Pick into a Release Branch.
After the release branch is first created, any subsequent changes use this process to update the release (often resulting in a new patch tag) without incorporating all changes in the default branch.
These MRs must be approved by the PMC before they are merged, since they alter the scope of the release.
To see more details about the change itself, look at the Original MR listed above.
#### Skipped Pipeline
Normally, pipelines are not executed on the cherry pick branch/MR prior to merging.
This optimization is accepted because the code was tested when it merged into the default branch, and will be tested again in the release branch prior to tagging.
However, if anybody feels that the MR requires further scrutiny -- whether because it had conflicts in the cherry-picking, it interfaces with some drastically altered logic between the branches, or any other reason -- we can run the pipeline here prior to merging.
#### If There's Reason to Run a Pipeline
If you want to see a pipeline result before this merges, first add a comment explaining why you'd like to see the pipeline results so the PMC and others know your thinking.
Then, mark the MR as a Draft MR (using the vertical ellipsis above, choose 'Mark as Draft').
This prevents the MR from being approved & merged accidentally by a busy release coordinator who didn't see your comment.
Finally, if you are a maintainer on the project, launch a pipeline on this branch.
Since this branch is a protected branch and the MR has ~no-detached-pipeline set, all integration tests will run and there's no need for any `trusted-*` branches.
[Launch a Pipeline for this Branch](https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/storage/-/pipelines/new?ref=cherry-pick-for-508)M14 - Release 0.17David Diederichd.diederich@opengroup.orgDavid Diederichd.diederich@opengroup.orghttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/storage/-/merge_requests/508Added valid access token for test case inputs2022-10-07T07:00:46ZThulasi Dass SubramanianAdded valid access token for test case inputs## Type of change
- [x] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provider implementation, if so which cloud?
- [ ] AWS
- [ ] Azure
- [ ] GCP
- [ ] IB...## Type of change
- [x] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provider implementation, if so which cloud?
- [ ] AWS
- [ ] Azure
- [ ] GCP
- [ ] IBM
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
- [NO]
## What is the current behavior?
Test case input with same access token is used for asserting different access related behavior
## What is the new/expected behavior?
Test case input with relevant access token is used for asserting different access related behavior
## Have you added/updated Unit Tests and Integration Tests?
updated Integration test input data for a single test case
## Any other useful information
Test data input fixM14 - Release 0.17Thulasi Dass SubramanianThulasi Dass Subramanianhttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/storage/-/merge_requests/458Add deletion of a record after integration test2022-09-16T08:28:15ZYifei XuAdd deletion of a record after integration test## Type of change
- [x] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud prov...## Type of change
- [x] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provider implementation, if so which cloud?
- [x] AWS
- [ ] Azure
- [ ] GCP
- [ ] IBM
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
- [NO]
## What is the current behavior?
A record is not deleted after the integration test. It should be.
## What is the new/expected behavior?
All records should be deleted.
## Have you added/updated Unit Tests and Integration Tests?
Yes
## Any other useful informationM13 - Release 0.16Yifei XuOkoun-Ola Fabien HouetoYifei Xuhttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/storage/-/merge_requests/262Mr fix trusted2023-08-18T22:23:01ZRitika KaushalMr fix trusted# Merge request template
reverted few rebase mistakes# Merge request template
reverted few rebase mistakesM9 - Release 0.12Ritika KaushalRitika Kaushalhttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/storage/-/merge_requests/257integration tests fix for schema api feature flag2023-08-18T22:23:04ZLarissa Pereiraintegration tests fix for schema api feature flagRelated ADR: [62](https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/storage/-/issues/62)
**Background** Instead of complete irreversible removal of the Storage Schema endpoints, a fail-safe option to restore application functionality...Related ADR: [62](https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/storage/-/issues/62)
**Background** Instead of complete irreversible removal of the Storage Schema endpoints, a fail-safe option to restore application functionality is needed in cases where missed dependencies on Storage Schemas APIs have gone undetected.
This MR fixes any integration test failures due to the feature flag by skipping the tests if the feature flag has been disabled (viz. schema endpoints are disabled)M10 - Release 0.13