Skip to content
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

[AIRFLOW-5843] Add conf option to Add DAG Run view #7281

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 2, 2020

Conversation

JCoder01
Copy link
Contributor

@JCoder01 JCoder01 commented Jan 28, 2020


Issue link: AIRFLOW-5843

Adds input field to allow passing of conf when adding a dag run in the UI.

image

image

Make sure to mark the boxes below before creating PR: [x]

  • Description above provides context of the change
  • Commit message/PR title starts with [AIRFLOW-NNNN]. AIRFLOW-NNNN = JIRA ID*
  • Unit tests coverage for changes (not needed for documentation changes)
  • Commits follow "How to write a good git commit message"
  • Relevant documentation is updated including usage instructions.
  • I will engage committers as explained in Contribution Workflow Example.

* For document-only changes commit message can start with [AIRFLOW-XXXX].


In case of fundamental code change, Airflow Improvement Proposal (AIP) is needed.
In case of a new dependency, check compliance with the ASF 3rd Party License Policy.
In case of backwards incompatible changes please leave a note in UPDATING.md.
Read the Pull Request Guidelines for more information.

@boring-cyborg boring-cyborg bot added the area:webserver Webserver related Issues label Jan 28, 2020
@ashb
Copy link
Member

ashb commented Jan 28, 2020

This has no tests, and there should also be a check to ensure that the conf field is valid JSON.

@JCoder01
Copy link
Contributor Author

@ashb is there a preferred way to validate the JSON or should I just add a try except with something like "Conf JSON isn't valid"?

@ashb
Copy link
Member

ashb commented Jan 29, 2020

@JCoder01 Yeah a try/except is probably good enough.

@JCoder01 JCoder01 force-pushed the AIRFLOW-5843 branch 2 times, most recently from 75aca35 to 8d9ab11 Compare January 29, 2020 19:16
@JCoder01
Copy link
Contributor Author

@ashb Ok, can you have a look?

Copy link
Member

@ashb ashb left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Other than the exception message this looks good.

@codecov-io
Copy link

codecov-io commented Jan 29, 2020

Codecov Report

❗ No coverage uploaded for pull request base (master@6287f81). Click here to learn what that means.
The diff coverage is 52.94%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##             master    #7281   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage          ?   32.33%           
=========================================
  Files             ?      863           
  Lines             ?    40458           
  Branches          ?        0           
=========================================
  Hits              ?    13083           
  Misses            ?    27375           
  Partials          ?        0
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
airflow/www/views.py 25.53% <100%> (ø)
airflow/www/validators.py 29.62% <45.45%> (ø)
airflow/www/forms.py 92% <60%> (ø)

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 6287f81...8d9ab11. Read the comment docs.

@kaxil kaxil merged commit 13d419a into apache:master Feb 2, 2020
@kaxil
Copy link
Member

kaxil commented Feb 2, 2020

Good work @JCoder01

kaxil added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 3, 2020
kaxil added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 3, 2020
galuszkak pushed a commit to FlyrInc/apache-airflow that referenced this pull request Mar 5, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area:webserver Webserver related Issues
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants