codecov[bot]
commented
1 year ago Codecov Report
Patch coverage: 100.00% and no project coverage change.
Comparison is base (
b9a0407) 97.89% compared to head (1af3d4e) 97.89%. Report is 1 commits behind head on master.
Additional details and impacted files
```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## master #398 +/- ## ======================================= Coverage 97.89% 97.89% ======================================= Files 77 77 Lines 6399 6399 ======================================= Hits 6264 6264 Misses 135 135 ``` | Flag | Coverage Δ | | |---|---|---| | unittests | `97.89% <100.00%> (ø)` | | Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. [Click here](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/carryforward-flags?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=openedx#carryforward-flags-in-the-pull-request-comment) to find out more. | [Files Changed](https://app.codecov.io/gh/openedx/xblock-lti-consumer/pull/398?src=pr&el=tree&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=openedx) | Coverage Δ | | |---|---|---| | [lti\_consumer/lti\_1p3/constants.py](https://app.codecov.io/gh/openedx/xblock-lti-consumer/pull/398?src=pr&el=tree&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=openedx#diff-bHRpX2NvbnN1bWVyL2x0aV8xcDMvY29uc3RhbnRzLnB5) | `100.00% <ø> (ø)` | | | [lti\_consumer/\_\_init\_\_.py](https://app.codecov.io/gh/openedx/xblock-lti-consumer/pull/398?src=pr&el=tree&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=openedx#diff-bHRpX2NvbnN1bWVyL19faW5pdF9fLnB5) | `100.00% <100.00%> (ø)` | |:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.
Related to https://github.com/edx/edx-exams/pull/154.
JIRA: https://2u-internal.atlassian.net/jira/software/projects/MST/boards/584?selectedIssue=MST-1961 Description
As of now, the ACS endpoint only supports a flag action. We would also like to support terminate as a way for Proctorio to communicate that they have ended an attempt.
Upon receiving a terminate request, the attempt referenced in the request should be moved to a corresponding status, depending on the reason for termination (reason_code) and incident_severity. The reason_code mappings should be clarified with Proctorio, and the incident_severity should be discussed internally to decide what range of values are considered passing.
Reason codes:
user_submission: move attempt to verified or second_review_required
error: move attempt to error
Severity:
we can just use a constant set to 0.25 for this at the moment
terminate with severity > 0.25 will move to second_review_required otherwise verified
Question: Do we want to store the reason code and incident severity in another model (similar to a review)?
work with dev on MST-1992: Return review info to exams-dashboard