Where communities thrive


  • Join over 1.5M+ people
  • Join over 100K+ communities
  • Free without limits
  • Create your own community
People
Repo info
Activity
  • 14:33
    borrob closed #155
  • 14:33
    borrob commented #155
  • 10:39
    justb4 closed #248
  • 10:39
    justb4 commented #248
  • 10:31

    justb4 on master

    Issue #248 fix - make 1.3.0 def… (compare)

  • 10:31
    justb4 closed #307
  • 10:30
    justb4 review_request_removed #307
  • 10:30
    justb4 commented #307
  • 10:21
    justb4 milestoned #307
  • 10:21
    justb4 labeled #307
  • 10:21
    justb4 assigned #307
  • 10:21
    justb4 review_requested #307
  • 10:21
    justb4 review_requested #307
  • Dec 04 20:20
    borrob assigned #248
  • Dec 04 20:19
    borrob reopened #248
  • Dec 04 20:19
    borrob closed #248
  • Dec 04 20:19
    borrob commented #248
  • Dec 04 20:18
    borrob opened #307
  • Nov 28 15:02
    justb4 closed #305
  • Nov 28 15:02

    justb4 on master

    #305 replace func_name and type… (compare)

Just van den Broecke
@justb4
@jampukka thanks, more upcoming like #285. Guess your service is the "NLS-FI topographical database - OGC WFS3", one of the few that also validates against the OpenAPI spec!
Rob van Loon
@borrob

My draft pull request for the conversion to python3 (#280) is about done! :) I updated the documentation assuming the conversion to python3 will trigger a new release (v0.8.0). Feedback and suggestions are welcome!

Would you prefer a new pull request with all the commits squared into one?

Tom Kralidis
@tomkralidis
@borrob that's fine, we will squash accordingly I think. Is the PR ready for review then?
Just van den Broecke
@justb4
@borrob Good news! See you also included recent commits. We only first need to bring out 0.7.0 before any merge. Yes, the merge button allows reviewers to squash, so no need. We'll have to review 37 files changed, try out locally, both with SQLite and PG, including with Docker. Once merged we need to go loose on the demo site, also watching logs, since it has a rich mix kinds of Resources/Probes/Checks.
Just van den Broecke
@justb4
Rob van Loon
@borrob
Thanks for the feedback. I will look into it.
Rob van Loon
@borrob
All review comments are addressed, but somehow Travis is having a bad day and refusing to build the docs with sphinx. I'll try and trigger a new Travis build later.
Just van den Broecke
@justb4
Think this is a good idea: "Ability to add same Service using same URL multiple times". See issue #292. Several use-cases, e.g. different schedules (once a day heavy/conformance test, every 5 mins uptime test). Change is minimal: remove check at app.py#551. I see no problems in this. url is not a unique column in DB. If no objections I'll make the PR.
Rob van Loon
@borrob
@justb4 Does seem like a good idea to me. In fact: it was my (perhaps naive) expectation that you could add the same url multiple times.
Tom Kralidis
@tomkralidis
@justb4 for @297, how does this solve #295 ?
Just van den Broecke
@justb4
Should be #292 typo!
Tom Kralidis
@tomkralidis
thanks @justb4 !
Just van den Broecke
@justb4
@/all 3 PRs went in yesterday, running on demo: 1) #292 can add Resource with same URL multiple times. 2) For #296 WFS3 (OAPIF) Probe OpenAPI link convention fix and 3) PR #300 results in better root error cause Check reporting for Probes. Smallish stuff, our big chunk ahead is the Py2->Py3 migration WIP #280 led by @borrob, we're quite far, nasty details with char/bytes encodings, any help/testing appreciated!
Rob van Loon
@borrob
I merged the three PRs into the py3 branch, so that should be up to date again. Now trying to iron out the issues with paver and then we might be up for some final testing.
Just van den Broecke
@justb4
@borrob good! See my last comment on WIP #280 : luckily no decoding errors for existing (Py2) DBs!
Rob van Loon
@borrob
@justb4 pffew. That is a relieve
Rob van Loon
@borrob
I would say that PR #280 is ready for review and testing (should solve issue #155).
Erkan70
@Erkan70
I am new to GeoHealthCheck. I have seen the Demo but leaves me a question: Is monitoring responses of Atom feeds supported?
Just van den Broecke
@justb4
@Erkan70 you can monitor any URL/API for availability and general health by using the Resource Type Web Address (URL) under Add in menu. You can then configure Checks like HTTP Status and keywords in content like feed and title. To really validate Atom contents like checking its links, a specific Atom Resource Type and Atom Probes/Checks (plugins) need to be developed.
Erkan70
@Erkan70
Nice, thanks!
Janne Heikkilä
@jampukka
Hi, seems like I can't edit the URL of my resource (demo.geohealthcheck.org) - would be cool if I could
Solved it by adding a new one and deleting the old one, so maybe not worth the effort unless an easy fix
fchtngr
@fchtngr
hi all. i got a question, is there any way to see the response i got for a failed run?
Just van den Broecke
@justb4
@fchtngr not the OWS responses themselves (could be 100s), but in the UI you can hover over the Run Graph (History) and then get the Full Report. There you can see which Probes failed, and for each Probewhich Check(s). See also the Failure Analysis documentation. Also in the Edit screen you have a Test button with a similar Run report. The reporting could be improved, yes and there are cases where one would like to see the actual response, requires some thinking as Probes are executed within the server.
fchtngr
@fchtngr
yes thx, i knew about those options already. but, as you said, sometimes it would be nice to see the actual response. or, i guess, the exact request to 'replay' it. then you also have a response to figure out what actually happened
btw, really liking the tool so far :)
theoretically i could write a plugin that queries some features (of which some attributes are links to images/video), and check whether they all return http 200 OK. should be possible, right?
Just van den Broecke
@justb4
Yes, see docs. Using a "free-form" Probe like the WMSDrilldown, anything goes as long as it returns a Result object. For OWS client calls you can use OWSLib (or just requests package).
fchtngr
@fchtngr
couldnt find anything in the docs on how to run the unittests, any hints?
Just van den Broecke
@justb4
A good one: built-in unittest is used, run from rootdir: python tests/run_tests.py (see also .travis.yml). Beware that your instance/config_site.py is taken and that the entire DB is filled/cleaned (see #188). Room for improvement, but you can test your Plugin by extending the DB data in fixtures. This will run your Plugin automatically via run_resources.py (run_plugins.py is used to test Plugin mechanism only).
Tom Kralidis
@tomkralidis

@borrob some minor comments on #280 -- fantastic work here!

As discussed, I will cut 0.7.0, branch 0.7 and then merge #280 once comments are addressed. Does this work for folks?

Just van den Broecke
@justb4
@tomkralidis @borrob : great, was just about to propose that!
Tom Kralidis
@tomkralidis
cutting releases / branch now
Just van den Broecke
@justb4
ok will need some text for: https://github.com/geopython/GeoHealthCheck/releases/tag/0.7.0 and a new Docker Image.
Tom Kralidis
@tomkralidis
@borrob can you address the PR comments for #280 ? I will merge thereafter.
Just van den Broecke
@justb4
shall I do the Docker Image 0.7.0? Release text: Most importantly: no DB-upgrades from 0.6.0 are required. Highlights in the 0.7.0 Milestone 40 PRs and issues.
Tom Kralidis
@tomkralidis
@justb4 please do
Just van den Broecke
@justb4
ok, building...
Just van den Broecke
@justb4
and Docker Image 0.7.0 works
Rob van Loon
@borrob
@tomkralidis Thanks! I will look into your comments coming week.
Tom Kralidis
@tomkralidis
Thanks @borrob
Rob van Loon
@borrob
The Python3 PR is ready to rock and roll!
Tom Kralidis
@tomkralidis
thanks @borrob ! @justb4 I can squash/merge once you review/comment
Tom Kralidis
@tomkralidis
@justb4 I am merging #280, ok?
Just van den Broecke
@justb4
@tomkralidis see my review at #280. We're good to go! After merge in about 15 mins we can check on https://demo.geohealthcheck.org.
(crossing msgs :-))
(as Docker image is built on GH push and pulled on demo site)
(and crossing fingers)
Just van den Broecke
@justb4
fixing readthedocs build (was still on Py2)...
.. build ok now.