Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

CI: adding datacite validation #181

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from
Closed

Conversation

djarecka
Copy link
Member

added publish=True to one test to enable datacite validation. The doi will be published on https://doi.test.datacite.org/ as Findable, so will not be able to remove it!

I'm creating doi with id = 000002 and random version = 0.0.{random.randrange(0, 9999)}

@djarecka djarecka changed the title CI: publishing CI: adding datacite validation May 19, 2023
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented May 19, 2023

Codecov Report

Patch coverage: 50.00% and project coverage change: -5.43 ⚠️

Comparison is base (845cb17) 97.71% compared to head (7868ad3) 92.29%.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #181      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   97.71%   92.29%   -5.43%     
==========================================
  Files          17       17              
  Lines        1751     1751              
==========================================
- Hits         1711     1616      -95     
- Misses         40      135      +95     
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 92.29% <50.00%> (-5.43%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Impacted Files Coverage Δ
dandischema/tests/test_datacite.py 49.45% <50.00%> (-50.55%) ⬇️

... and 1 file with indirect coverage changes

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

dandi_id = f"DANDI:{dandi_id_noprefix}"
version = "0.0.0"
version = f"0.0.{random.randrange(0, 9999)}"
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

instead of random, perhaps use the current date+time in some form.

@satra
Copy link
Member

satra commented May 19, 2023

i think it would be good to limit the publishing test to only the platform that dandiarchive uses, so we don't have to test it for all options and limit the number of published dois on the test site.

@djarecka
Copy link
Member Author

@satra - you mean just to use for one of the linux containers we have, not adding a new one that is the same as dandiarchive uses, right?

@satra
Copy link
Member

satra commented May 19, 2023

you mean just to use for one of the linux containers we have

yes, one of the containers that matches the dandiarchive deployment. we should ask @mvandenburgh - how we can make sure to always have a setting that's as close to, if not identical, to the deployment versions on heroku.

@satra
Copy link
Member

satra commented Jun 19, 2023

closing this since #167 was merged.

@satra satra closed this Jun 19, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants