Skip to content

Remove call to nonexistent endpoint - #865

Open
d-j-hatton wants to merge 6 commits into
mainfrom
remove-call-to-nonexistent-endpoint
Open

Remove call to nonexistent endpoint#865
d-j-hatton wants to merge 6 commits into
mainfrom
remove-call-to-nonexistent-endpoint

Conversation

@d-j-hatton

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Fixes bug introduced in #863. Currently it tries to do a database update through an endpoint that doesn't exist but as it is part of the API it should just do the update itself.

@d-j-hatton
d-j-hatton requested a review from tieneupin August 18, 2026 08:54
@codecov

codecov Bot commented Aug 18, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 7.31707% with 38 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 53.98%. Comparing base (3c73ca5) to head (0ba9700).
⚠️ Report is 4 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #865      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   54.64%   53.98%   -0.67%     
==========================================
  Files         104      104              
  Lines       11159    11518     +359     
  Branches     1475     1579     +104     
==========================================
+ Hits         6098     6218     +120     
- Misses       4741     4947     +206     
- Partials      320      353      +33     
🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

Comment on lines 22 to 29

@tieneupin tieneupin Aug 18, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This function is repeated in almost every module where SmartEM is used. I wonder if it's worth breaking it out into a helper function in a module in murfey.util or smartem_backend.

@tieneupin tieneupin left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The logic for loading the SmartEM KeyCloak client seems pretty repetitive, so I wonder if it's worth breaking it out into a helper function in a module in murfey.util or smartem_backend.

Other than that, I couldn't spot any noticeable issues!

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.

2 participants