Support wildcards in COPR allowed list#2907
Conversation
Summary of ChangesHello @evgeni, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed! This pull request introduces a significant enhancement to Packit's COPR integration by allowing the use of wildcards in the allowed list for forge projects. This change provides greater flexibility for users to define broader patterns for permitted projects, simplifying configuration and management, especially for large organizations or projects with consistent naming conventions. The update ensures that the system can now match project names against patterns like Highlights
Using Gemini Code AssistThe full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips. Invoking Gemini You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either
Customization To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a Limitations & Feedback Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here. You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension. Footnotes
|
![gemini-code-assist[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/956858?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This pull request introduces support for wildcards in the COPR allowed list, which is a great enhancement. The implementation looks correct, and the added tests cover the new functionality well.
I've added a couple of suggestions to improve the robustness of the code by handling cases where the allowed list might be None, and to add a corresponding test case.
Overall, this is a solid contribution.
| ) | ||
| allowed_projects = copr_project["packit_forge_projects_allowed"] | ||
| allowed = self.forge_project in allowed_projects | ||
| allowed = any( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The allowed_projects variable could be None if the packit_forge_projects_allowed field is not set in the Copr project settings. This would cause an AttributeError when splitlines() is called. To make this more robust, you can handle the None case.
| allowed = any( | |
| allowed = any(fnmatch.fnmatch(self.forge_project, pattern) for pattern in (allowed_projects or "").splitlines()) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think the API will ever return None here. And the old code wasn't accounting for that either (in doesn't work on None).
| pytest.param( | ||
| JobConfig( | ||
| type=JobType.copr_build, | ||
| trigger=JobConfigTriggerType.pull_request, | ||
| packages={ | ||
| "package": CommonPackageConfig( | ||
| owner="the-owner", | ||
| project="the-project", | ||
| ), | ||
| }, | ||
| ), | ||
| "something/different\ngit.instance.io/the/example/namespace/*", | ||
| True, | ||
| id="wildcard-more-values", | ||
| ), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
To improve test coverage and ensure robustness, please consider adding a test case for when packit_forge_projects_allowed is None. This will verify that the application handles this edge case gracefully without raising an exception.
You could add a parameter like this:
pytest.param(
JobConfig(
type=JobType.copr_build,
trigger=JobConfigTriggerType.pull_request,
packages={
"package": CommonPackageConfig(
owner="the-owner",
project="the-project",
),
},
),
None,
False,
id="none-allowed-list",
),
|
Build succeeded. ✔️ packit-service-tests SUCCESS in 19s (non-voting) |
|
Build succeeded. ✔️ packit-service-tests SUCCESS in 19s (non-voting) |
|
Build succeeded. ✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 1m 46s |
lbarcziova
left a comment
lbarcziova
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
thanks a lot for the contribution!
Schema incorrectly defined field as String instead of List(String), causing Flask-RESTX to stringify the list in API responses. Context: packit/packit-service#2907 (comment) Assisted-by: Cursor(Claude)
Schema incorrectly defined field as String instead of List(String), causing Flask-RESTX to stringify the list in API responses. Context: packit/packit-service#2907 (comment) Assisted-by: Cursor(Claude)
|
Build succeeded. ✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 1m 44s |
|
Build succeeded. ✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 2m 00s |
|
@lbarcziova fedora-copr/copr#4092 was deployed, so we can continue this now :) |
|
Build succeeded. ✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 1m 53s |
|
Build succeeded (gate pipeline). ✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 1m 50s |
5 participants
TODO:
packit/packit.dev.Fixes #2906
Related to fedora-copr/copr#3804
Merge before/after
RELEASE NOTES BEGIN
Packit now supports wildcards in COPR allow lists
RELEASE NOTES END