Open
Conversation
Author
|
I force-pushed an update to keep the run-id consistent throughout the API response. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
based on this issue items that aren't included in the 'attributes' part of a response were being dropped when the model is being constructed from the API response.
Testing plan
"run-ugBnsFDyDviC876w")run.pyfile locally.I used the json reponse from the API as a test case to run the existing
run-detailed-123case and found that it failed if I added an assertionassert result.created_by.id == "user-FRJGnNMX6fpe9Cdd"updated the
run.pyresource to properly handle the response items that are not nested withinattributes(i.e.relationships)External links
Output from tests
Rollback Plan
N/A
Changes to Security Controls
N/A
PCI review checklist
I have documented a clear reason for, and description of, the change I am making.
[N/A] If applicable, I've documented a plan to revert these changes if they require more than reverting the pull request.
[N/A] If applicable, I've documented the impact of any changes to security controls.
Examples of changes to security controls include using new access control methods, adding or removing logging pipelines, etc.
If you have any questions, please contact your direct supervisor, GRC (#team-grc), or the PCI working group (#proj-pci-reboot). You can also find more information at PCI Compliance.