Fix test syntax issues.#530
Conversation
|
Thanks John very useful. I will change the workflow I am responsible of. |
|
He did it in #317 but unfortunately few have integrated the changes.... |
|
If it is ok for you. We can split this PR into 2. |
|
Is there a way to integrate this into planemo lint? |
|
It will make its way there - I'm going to open the PR to Galaxy's tool_util package today that is the first step. |
|
Thanks. |
|
I put here the output of the tests: Test Summary
|
|
Here are the failed tests one by one:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For
|
| average_bigwigs: | ||
| class: Collection | ||
| collection_type: list | ||
| attributes: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What's the model behind this ? attributes seems kind of odd, shouldn't this nest directly under the output ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It should and I will implement that in follow ups but that is an enhancement - this version of the models just reflects what actually works with current planemo. I don't think anyone ever thought this through and so it is a pretty low-level mapping to the XML parsing outputs.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Don't ask my why I put this test... I cannot remember.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
(I think I am the only one to use this type of test)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
|
All tests passing have been integrated into #531 .
|
| asserts: | ||
| has_text: | ||
| text: "SuCOS_Score" | ||
| n: 4 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this will only test the last one, do you have a check for this?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think that's really checkable as that's a yaml language issue, we don't go that deep.
| n: 8 | ||
| tooldistillator_summarize: | ||
| assert: | ||
| asserts: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
below there are multiple 'has_text' and only the last one will be tested, right?
| asserts: | ||
| has_line: | ||
| line: "$$$$" | ||
| n: 4 | ||
| asserts: | ||
| has_text: | ||
| text: "SuCOS_Score" | ||
| n: 4 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| asserts: | |
| has_line: | |
| line: "$$$$" | |
| n: 4 | |
| asserts: | |
| has_text: | |
| text: "SuCOS_Score" | |
| n: 4 | |
| asserts: | |
| has_line: | |
| line: "$$$$" | |
| n: 4 | |
| has_text: | |
| text: "SuCOS_Score" | |
| n: 4 |
|
@jmchilton or @mvdbeek would you mind to rebase with main and check if there are other issues to solve, please? |
|
Closing this - I think we've worked through this from different angles. If I'm missing anything - please yell and I'm sorry for all the noise. |
I guess @mvdbeek already did this with an alternative way of automatically verifying the syntax with https://github.com/galaxyproject/iwc/pull/317/files. This is what it took to get some pydantic models I'm working on to pass - though I still am skipping a few assembly workflows that use a syntax for checking output parameter values that I need to figure out how to model.