Coverage for graphite.whitelist#1572
Conversation
Current coverage is 56.73%@@ master #1572 diff @@
==========================================
Files 52 52
Lines 5781 5780 -1
Methods 0 0
Messages 0 0
Branches 1111 1111
==========================================
+ Hits 3252 3279 +27
+ Misses 2328 2300 -28
Partials 201 201
|
|
Thank you for this, @cbowman0 |
* Fix graphite.whitelist.load_whitelist() * Add test cases for show, add and remove * Test save_whitelist failure scenarios
3a00d67 to
cddfe40
Compare
|
I adjusted the testing to be deterministic. I would like someone else from @graphite-project/committers to confirm the changes to load_whitelist() is ok. Once that is merged, I will help @gwaldo with adjusting the test cases to work with his wording changes, if required. |
|
@cbowman0 why the change from graphite-web/webapp/graphite/util.py Lines 159 to 212 in af7c0c1 |
|
@obfuscurity Because it currently doesn't work. Calls to load_whitelist() error with: |
|
Ah right, we're loading from a file, not a string. Looks like a typo from c198e58. Yeah, this change looks good. 👍 |
|
Alternatively, we can do: and add set to the PICKLE_SAFE set. I can do that quickly, if that's preferred. |
|
@cbowman0 Yeah, good idea. |
|
Done. Once automated checks go green again, I'll merge it. |
I had this mostly together, so in light of issue #1569 and pull request #1570, I submit this for test cases before the wording changes.
Of note, the load_whitelist() function was not working before this change. If the preferred method is to read the blob in and use unpickle.loads(), then that can be done.