refactor srm srv for detail states and comment #839
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
reisingerf
reviewed
Feb 2, 2025
Comment on lines
35
to
54
| # sequence status in SUCCEEDED: | ||
| # if transition from STARTED to SUCCEEDED, set comment to "Sequence complete" | ||
| # if transition from FAILED to SUCCEEDED, set comment to "Conversion re-triggered, and sequence completed.' | ||
| if sequence.status == SequenceStatus.SUCCEEDED: | ||
| previous_state = State.objects.filter(sequence=sequence).order_by('-timestamp').first() | ||
| if previous_state is not None and SequenceStatus.from_seq_run_status(previous_state.status) == SequenceStatus.STARTED: | ||
| comment = "Sequence completed. Now in state " + status + " ." | ||
| if previous_state is not None and SequenceStatus.from_seq_run_status(previous_state.status) == SequenceStatus.FAILED: | ||
| comment = "Conversion re-triggered, and sequence completed. Now in state " + status + " ." | ||
|
|
||
| # sequence status in FAILED: | ||
| # if transition from SUCCEEDED to FAILED, set comment to "Sequence completed. But failed in post analysis process." | ||
| # if transition from STARTED to FAILED, set comment to "Sequence failed. Now in state " + status + " ." | ||
| if sequence.status == SequenceStatus.FAILED: | ||
| previous_state = State.objects.filter(sequence=sequence).order_by('-timestamp').first() | ||
| if previous_state is not None and SequenceStatus.from_seq_run_status(previous_state.status) == SequenceStatus.SUCCEEDED: | ||
| comment = "Sequence completed. But failed in post analysis process." | ||
| else: | ||
| comment = "Sequence failed. Now in state " + status + " ." | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
All this is to set a comment?
I don't think that's needed. With the separation of state and status, it should be quite clear what's going on.
I'd preserve the comments for irregular, unpredictable, manual user added text rather than being auto-populated.
(if something is predictable and can be auto-generated I always feel it should be in a structured format and not in free text, and with the state / status we have that already)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes, sure, these can be removed as redundant for states.
reisingerf
approved these changes
Feb 3, 2025
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Sequence Run Manager service refactor
fix #848