Skip to content

Oonirun v2 1 #962

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

Open
wants to merge 72 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Oonirun v2 1 #962

wants to merge 72 commits into from

Conversation

LDiazN
Copy link
Contributor

@LDiazN LDiazN commented May 23, 2025

Add DB model migrations, new view models and some tests. Related to #955

@LDiazN LDiazN requested a review from hellais May 23, 2025 08:05
@LDiazN LDiazN self-assigned this May 23, 2025
Copy link

codecov bot commented May 23, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 82.76%. Comparing base (d57a18f) to head (70240f3).
Report is 4 commits behind head on master.

❌ Your project check has failed because the head coverage (82.76%) is below the target coverage (95.00%). You can increase the head coverage or adjust the target coverage.

❗ There is a different number of reports uploaded between BASE (d57a18f) and HEAD (70240f3). Click for more details.

HEAD has 4 uploads less than BASE
Flag BASE (d57a18f) HEAD (70240f3)
ooniauth 1 0
oonifindings 1 0
oonirun 1 0
ooniprobe 1 0
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #962      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   91.81%   82.76%   -9.05%     
==========================================
  Files          61       19      -42     
  Lines        5179     1938    -3241     
  Branches      339      208     -131     
==========================================
- Hits         4755     1604    -3151     
+ Misses        365      285      -80     
+ Partials       59       49      -10     
Flag Coverage Δ
ooniauth ?
oonifindings ?
oonimeasurements 82.76% <ø> (+0.13%) ⬆️
ooniprobe ?
oonirun ?

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

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@hellais
Copy link
Member

hellais commented May 26, 2025

This is a good start, I left a few comments for things to improve or change. Regarding handling of the targets_name, I would place logic for that inside of the get_nettests function and have in it a hardcoded list of supported targets_name that we know how to handle.

For the moment we only support the targets_name of websites_list_prioritized, which uses the pio code to generate a list following the same logic of check (see: https://github.com/ooni/backend/blob/master/api/ooniapi/probe_services.py#L234). You will need to pass into it all the metadata of the probe and the is_charging, is_manual_run flags.

Copy link
Member

@hellais hellais left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I left some comments for things to go over before merging.

Also, I noticed in several places there is some odd formatting (eg. there being an extra space around :, like "foo" : "bar"). Could you run black on all the files you edited to make the formatting consistent?

Copy link
Member

@hellais hellais left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is PR is good to go.

The steps to get this into production are:

  • Deploy this branch into the dev environment by updating the terraform configs
  • Run migration on the dev database
  • Test that the dev environment with OONI Run v2.1 works on the OONI Probe mobile apps
  • Test that the dev environment with OONI Run v2.1 works with miniooni
  • Merge this PR which will lead to a production deployment
  • Run migration on the prod database

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.

4 participants