Bringing back the green tick (i.e. pass the tests again)

[josenavas]

Depends on #1641, so review/merge that one first.

This PR fixes the tests in this branch so they're passing again.

[josenavas]

The changes on this PR seems a lot, however, I have not done that many changes. The changes that I have done are:

1. I split up the file qiita_pet/test/test_study_handlers.py in multiple files under the qiita_pet/handlers/study_handlers/tests directory, which is where they should be and one test file per library file.
2. Remove unused code due to the refactoring done in this branch
3. Remove duplicated tests due to some previous merge conflict
4. Note which objects need still to be tested
5. Added -v to .travis.yml
6. Fix the failing tests

[antgonza]

running. -> running,

[josenavas]

Done

[antgonza]

Some minor comments, then 👍

[josenavas]

I also split up the tests in read/only and read/write

[josenavas]

Looks like I'm not gonna be able to reduce the running time of the tests here w/o blowing up the size of the PR. @ElDeveloper can you review/merge this one? I have another PR in (#1667) that is doing some work reducing the running time.

[squirrelo]

not part of tests, but this should be renamed to emp_person since it's no longer the ID.

[josenavas]

That's incorrect - note how it is actually the id, the ones that are no longer the id are the principal_investigator and the lab_person

[squirrelo]

Went is this still the id but the rest are not? We should be consistent.
On Feb 27, 2016 14:17, "Jose Navas" notifications@github.com wrote:

In qiita_db/test/test_study.py
#1647 (comment):

@@ -147,11 +145,11 @@ def setUp(self):
'metadata_complete': True,
'reprocess': False,
'number_samples_promised': 27,

•        'emp_person_id': qdb.study.StudyPerson(2),
  

•        'emp_person_id': 2,
  

That's incorrect - note how it is actually the id, the ones that are no
longer the id are the principal_investigator and the lab_person

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
https://github.com/biocore/qiita/pull/1647/files#r54337870.

[josenavas]

@antgonza @ElDeveloper @mortonjt emp_person is not used anywhere in the code and I think we should drop it as that is something that we will be keeping track in Jira, not Qiita. Should we spend time fixing that or just agree that we are going to drop it?

[josenavas]

Added an issue to discuss that: #1668

[squirrelo]

Some comments

[mortonjt]

Noticing that there are quite a few TODOs. Those aren't being covered in this PR correct?

I don't see any obvious issues aside from what @antgonza and @squirrelo . Perhaps @ElDeveloper should take another look over this.

[josenavas]

Comments answered.

[josenavas]

@mortonjt yes, the TODO's will be addressed in subsequent PR. The problem that I was facing here is that I can't do more development reliable w/o having the tests passing. This and my next PR #1667 are making the tests to pass again.

[antgonza]

@josenavas thanks for working on this. @squirrelo thanks for quick reviews. Merging now.