ProFormA Import: fix file duplication#3059
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Conversation
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@## main #3059 +/- ## ========================================== + Coverage 70.24% 70.26% +0.01% ========================================== Files 215 215 Lines 6850 6853 +3 ========================================== + Hits 4812 4815 +3 Misses 2038 2038 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
kkoehnforce-pushed the 3004-improve-proforma-compatibility-between-codeocean-and-codeharbor-for-multi-referenced-files branch from ca97dd2 to 626892aComparekkoehnforce-pushed the 3004-improve-proforma-compatibility-between-codeocean-and-codeharbor-for-multi-referenced-files branch from 626892a to d1c54e4Compare
| validates:weight,absence: true,unless: :teacher_defined_assessment? | ||
| validates:file,presence: trueif:context.is_a?(Submission) | ||
| validates:context_type,inclusion: {in: ALLOWED_CONTEXT_TYPES} | ||
| validates:path,uniqueness: {scope: %I[namefile_typecontext_idcontext_typerole]} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Don't we have records that have this issue right now? I am worried that this migration will suddenly stop teachers from editing the file.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not sure about any existing records, since I don't have access, but it would indeed be important to check before merging this PR.
| expect{convert_to_exercise_service.save!}.tochange(Exercise,:count).by(1) | ||
| end | ||
| context'with two files with similar contents'do |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I apologize for my lack of understanding. Should we not ensure that the exported file has no duplicates? Won't we have the same issue in CodeHarbor after exporting the it from CodeHarbor and importing it again to CodeHarbor?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Are the duplicates some requirement in the ProformaXML spec?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It would be preferable to also fix the export of CodeHarbor, since I only addressed the import of tasks with multi-referenced files and not the export.
It would be even better to enable CodeHarbor to support the multi-referenced files directly (which would require a serious time investment).
path