Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

chore(deps): updating package versions #252

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Aug 19, 2024
Merged
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension


Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
62 changes: 31 additions & 31 deletions .github/workflows/docker-push.yml
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -2,39 +2,39 @@ name: Build and Push enigma image to Docker
on:
push:
tags:
- 'v*'
- v*

jobs:
build:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- name: Check out the repo
uses: actions/checkout@v3
- name: Set up QEMU
uses: docker/setup-qemu-action@v2
- name: Set up Docker Buildx
uses: docker/setup-buildx-action@v2
- name: Docker metadata
id: meta
uses: docker/metadata-action@v4
with:
images: |
browserstack/enigma
tags: |
type=semver,pattern=v{{version}}
type=semver,pattern=v{{major}}.{{minor}}
type=semver,pattern=v{{major}}
- name: Login to DockerHub
uses: docker/login-action@v2
with:
username: ${{ secrets.DOCKERHUB_USERNAME }}
password: ${{ secrets.DOCKERHUB_TOKEN }}
- name: Build and push
uses: docker/build-push-action@v4
with:
context: .
push: true
platforms: linux/amd64, linux/arm64/v8
target: web
tags: ${{ steps.meta.outputs.tags }}
labels: ${{ steps.meta.outputs.labels }}
- name: Check out the repo
uses: actions/checkout@v3
- name: Set up QEMU
uses: docker/setup-qemu-action@v2
- name: Set up Docker Buildx
uses: docker/setup-buildx-action@v2
- name: Docker metadata
id: meta
uses: docker/metadata-action@v4
with:
images: |
browserstack/enigma
tags: |
type=semver,pattern=v{{version}}
type=semver,pattern=v{{major}}.{{minor}}
type=semver,pattern=v{{major}}
- name: Login to DockerHub
uses: docker/login-action@v2
with:
username: ${{ secrets.DOCKERHUB_USERNAME }}
password: ${{ secrets.DOCKERHUB_TOKEN }}
- name: Build and push
uses: docker/build-push-action@v4
with:
context: .
push: true
platforms: linux/amd64, linux/arm64/v8
target: web
tags: ${{ steps.meta.outputs.tags }}
labels: ${{ steps.meta.outputs.labels }}
6 changes: 3 additions & 3 deletions .pre-commit-config.yaml
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
# See https://pre-commit.com/hooks.html for more hooks
repos:
- repo: https://github.com/pre-commit/pre-commit-hooks
rev: v4.4.0
rev: v4.6.0
hooks:
- id: check-merge-conflict
- id: trailing-whitespace
Expand All @@ -19,11 +19,11 @@ repos:
files: \.(json|json.sample)$
args: [--autofix, --no-sort-keys]
- repo: https://github.com/macisamuele/language-formatters-pre-commit-hooks
rev: v2.6.0
rev: v2.14.0
hooks:
- id: pretty-format-yaml
args: [--autofix]
- repo: https://github.com/alessandrojcm/commitlint-pre-commit-hook
rev: v9.4.0
rev: v9.16.0
hooks:
- id: commitlint
3 changes: 1 addition & 2 deletions Access/tests/features/get_pending_request.feature
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
Feature : Get Pending Request

Scenario: Retrieving All Pending Requests
Given request to view all pending requests
When the `get_pending_requests` method is called
Expand All @@ -13,4 +13,3 @@ Feature : Get Pending Request
When the `get_pending_requests` method is called
Then the method should handle the error
And return an error response

19 changes: 9 additions & 10 deletions Access/tests/features/get_request_access.feature
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
Feature: Get Request Access

Scenario: verify generic form key
Given empty configured access_modules are There
And get_request has zero modules
Expand All @@ -8,14 +8,14 @@ Feature: Get Request Access

Scenario: get_access_request returns correct response
Given four configured access_modules are There
And get_request has four modules
When get_request_access function is called
And get_request has four modules
When get_request_access function is called
Then Return value should return all four access list with all seven present keynames

Scenario: get_access_request returns correct response with extra fields
Given four configured access_modules are There
And two with extra fields and two without extra fields
When get_request_access function is called
When get_request_access function is called
Then Return value should return all four access with extra fields

Scenario: get_access_request returns correct response with notice/alert
Expand All @@ -26,30 +26,29 @@ Feature: Get Request Access

Scenario: verify response with array of access list with two elements
Given four configured access_modules are There
And get_request has two modules
And get_request has two modules
When get_request_access function is called
Then Return value should be access list with two modules

Scenario: verify response with array of access list with empty elements
Given four configured access_modules are There
And get_request has zero modules
And get_request has zero modules
When get_request_access function is called
Then Return value should be empty access list

Scenario: verify response with array of access list with all elements
Given four configured access_modules are There
And get_request has four modules
And get_request has four modules
When get_request_access function is called
Then Return value should return all four access list with all seven present keynames

Scenario: get_request_access is called with invalid parameters
Given four configured access_modules are There
And get_request does not have accesses key
And get_request does not have accesses key
When get_request_access function is called
Then Return value should be error json

Scenario: get_request_access is called with invalid request type
Given request is post request
When get_request_access function is called for invalid request type
Then Return value should be error json

21 changes: 10 additions & 11 deletions Access/tests/features/validate_approver_permissions.feature
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -1,13 +1,13 @@
Feature: Validate Approver Permission

Scenario: User who made the request has primary approver access & access_mapping is not in pending state & module does not need secondary approval
Given User who made request has primary approver access
And access_mapping is not in pending state
And Modules does not need secondary approval
When validate_approver_permissions function is called
When validate_approver_permissions function is called
Then Return value should be empty json

Scenario: _get_approver_permissions raises an Exception, the function should return error message as json
Scenario: _get_approver_permissions raises an Exception, the function should return error message as json
Given _get_approver_permissions raises an exception when called
When validate_approver_permissions function is called
Then Return value should be error json
Expand All @@ -18,40 +18,39 @@ Feature: Validate Approver Permission
And Modules does not need secondary approval
When validate_approver_permissions function is called
Then Return value should be permission denied json

Scenario: User who made the request has secondary approver access & access_mapping is not in pending state & module supports secondary approval
Given User who made request has secondary approver access
And access_mapping is not in pending state
And Modules supports secondary approval
When validate_approver_permissions function is called
Then Return value should be empty json

Scenario: User who made the request has primary approver access & access_mapping is not in pending state & module supports secondary approval
Scenario: User who made the request has primary approver access & access_mapping is not in pending state & module supports secondary approval
Given User who made request has primary approver access with false response
And access_mapping is not in pending state
And Modules supports secondary approval
When validate_approver_permissions function is called
Then Return value should be permission denied json


Scenario: When the user who made the request has primary approver access & access_mapping is in pending state & module does not need secondary approval
Scenario: When the user who made the request has primary approver access & access_mapping is in pending state & module does not need secondary approval
Given User who made request has primary approver access
And access_mapping is in pending state
And Modules does not need secondary approval
When validate_approver_permissions function is called
Then Return value should be empty json

Scenario: When the user who made the request has primary approver access & access_mapping is in pending state & module does needs secondary approval
Scenario: When the user who made the request has primary approver access & access_mapping is in pending state & module does needs secondary approval
Given User who made request has primary approver access
And access_mapping is in pending state
And Modules supports secondary approval
When validate_approver_permissions function is called
When validate_approver_permissions function is called
Then Return value should be empty json

Scenario: When the user who made the request has secondary approver access & access_mapping is in primary pending state & module does needs secondary approval
Scenario: When the user who made the request has secondary approver access & access_mapping is in primary pending state & module does needs secondary approval
Given User who made request has only secondary approver access with false response
And access_mapping is in pending state
And Modules does not need secondary approval
When validate_approver_permissions function is called
When validate_approver_permissions function is called
Then Return value should be permission denied json

4 changes: 2 additions & 2 deletions README.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -48,7 +48,7 @@ Enigma access management tool was developed internally at BrowserStack to solve
The following steps are for hosting Enigma locally from published docker container images.

For development setup, follow these docs:
[Setup using docker](/docs/“How-to”%20guides/User%20Guides/Local%20Developer%20Setup/Local%20Setup%20with%20Docker.md),
[Setup using docker](/docs/“How-to”%20guides/User%20Guides/Local%20Developer%20Setup/Local%20Setup%20with%20Docker.md),
[Setup without docker](/docs/“How-to”%20guides/User%20Guides/Local%20Developer%20Setup/Local%20Setup%20without%20Docker.md)

#### Pre-requisites
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -84,7 +84,7 @@ For first time user sign-in, follow [this doc](/docs/%E2%80%9CHow-to%E2%80%9D%20
- The codebase is tested for Python 3.11.0
- Setup pre-commit hooks for development (see rules [below](#rules-enforced-by-the-pre-commit-hooks))
- run: `npm install @commitlint/cli @commitlint/config-conventional`
- run: `pip install pre-commit==2.21.0`
- run: `pip install pre-commit==3.8.0`
- run: `pre-commit install --install-hooks --overwrite` in the base directory of this project
- run: `pre-commit autoupdate`
- run: `pre-commit run --all-files --show-diff-on-failure --color always`
Expand Down
Loading
Loading