-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4
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
Updates all AWS gems and skips some assertions and tests #1329
Conversation
Our tests have some syntax errors in some of the mocks. We will fix them, but for now we are skipping failures and pushing the updated gems to allow us to read the production SQS queues which is not currently possible due to a change introduced somewhere in SQS or the associated gems.
All failing tests in the DspacePublicationResultsJob test are related to the stubbed message that involves a bad checksum. On further investigation, this message has the same `message_id` as another message. [The SQS API docs](https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSSimpleQueueService/latest/APIReference/API_Message.html) specify that the `MessageId` property must be unique. It's possible that this was always the case, but it was only enforced in more recent versions of `aws-sdk-sqs`, which would explain why these tests only started erroring when we tried to upgrade the gem.
@@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ def setup | |||
'SubmissionSource' => { string_value: 'ETD', data_type: 'String' } } }, | |||
|
|||
# success but thesis no longer has files locally | |||
{ message_id: 'id1a', receipt_handle: 'handle1a', | |||
{ message_id: 'id1b', receipt_handle: 'handle1a', |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I... lol. Great catch!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, I felt pretty silly when I caught that. 😅 (Both that we had duplicate IDs, and that we chose such a weird, brittle naming pattern!)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
See the commit I pushed for a possible solution to the failing test issue. I'm approving this with or without that commit, as I think it's safe to skip those tests based on my current understanding.
Thank you for taking the time to solve this and upgrade these long-outdated gems!
Our tests have some syntax errors in some of the mocks. We will fix them, but for now we are skipping failures and pushing the updated gems to allow us to read the production SQS queues which is not currently possible due to a change introduced somewhere in SQS or the associated gems.
Requires database migrations?
NO
Includes new or updated dependencies?
YES