search

mbr / simplekv

A simple key-value store for binary data.
http://simplekv.readthedocs.io
MIT License
152 stars 50 forks source link

Workaround for missing has_key implementation #100

Closed fjetter closed 4 years ago

fjetter commented 4 years ago

The new storage API apparently doesn't offer any exists implementation.

This is already reported on https://github.com/Azure/azure-sdk-for-python/issues/9507 and they suggest a rather crude workaround...

fjetter commented 4 years ago

cc @crepererum @byjott

coveralls commented 4 years ago

Coverage Status

Coverage remained the same at 73.206% when pulling e3e38292f4a8b1e1ebee23d44ec87cca619a08f4 on fjetter:azure_blob/has_key into df60b792acd0e283edd06f6a51eb87910f6a4758 on mbr:master.

fjetter commented 4 years ago

Looks to me the code is not actually tested on travis. Will investigate this...

criemen commented 4 years ago

Yes, this is because the azure keys we received from microsoft are only available to pull requests from the mbr/simplekv repository. This is a limitation put in place by the travis secret feature, so external parties cannot extract secret keys from repositories

fjetter commented 4 years ago

@Cornelius-Riemenschneider So PRs from outside will not trigger this?

criemen commented 4 years ago

PRs from the outside shouldn't run the azure tests, no. The exact details elude me, though I believe whenever we don't have azure secrets provided to the test runner, azure tests are (silently) skipped. This is also the source of all the coverage dropped comments on all external PRs.

fjetter commented 4 years ago

How to proceed with this? the new azure storage API still breaks with simplekv

fjetter commented 4 years ago

status on this? Can anybody merge and release this, please?

fjetter commented 4 years ago

If somebody gives me write access I can recreate the PR on this repo to verify the tests if this is a blocker. Otherwise I'd also be fine if one of the maintainers does the same

fmarczin commented 4 years ago

Replaced by #102