Fixes #4522

[acolytec3]

Description

Replace deprecated ifpsapi library with ipfshttpclient in dashboard, kudos, and healthcheck.. Add tests for dashboard.utils that interact with IPFS.

Refers/Fixes

Fixes #4522'

Testing

Added tests for get_ipfs and ipfs_cat_ipfsapi in dashboard.utils to verify connectivity and retrieval of objects by IPFS hash string are working.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #4552 into master will decrease coverage by 0.03%.
The diff coverage is 60%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #4552      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   30.17%   30.13%   -0.04%     
==========================================
  Files         209      209              
  Lines       16886    16886              
  Branches     2278     2278              
==========================================
- Hits         5095     5089       -6     
- Misses      11594    11600       +6     
  Partials      197      197

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
app/kudos/utils.py	20.37% <50%> (ø)	⬆️
app/dashboard/utils.py	34.49% <66.66%> (ø)	⬆️
app/dashboard/embed.py	28.16% <0%> (-3.45%)	⬇️

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 4ec5cca...50c1102. Read the comment docs.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❗ No coverage uploaded for pull request base (master@bba6294). Click here to learn what that means.
The diff coverage is 66.66%.

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##             master    #4552   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage          ?   30.66%           
=========================================
  Files             ?      216           
  Lines             ?    17498           
  Branches          ?     2389           
=========================================
  Hits              ?     5365           
  Misses            ?    11916           
  Partials          ?      217

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
app/healthcheck/healthchecks.py	40% <0%> (ø)
app/dashboard/utils.py	37.12% <100%> (ø)
app/kudos/utils.py	20.37% <33.33%> (ø)

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update bba6294...b126a1b. Read the comment docs.

[acolytec3]

Hold on this. I thought everything was working and now I'm seeing some errors in my local build.

[acolytec3]

Appears to be working now that I've corrected the connect parameters. I'm not seeing the connection errors that surfaced previously so should be ready for review.

[acolytec3]

@owocki @kuhnchris Any chance I could get this reviewed? Would love to get it closed so I can move on a look at applying for some other bounties.

Thanks!

[kuhnchris]

@danlipert do you have time to review this? Else I'll take a look

[danlipert]

@kuhnchris @acolytec3 The existing tests are pretty lackluster and don't really test IPFS. I'd like some a better writeup of how this change was tested and what the differences are between this library and the newer one. Is it simply a rename? Since there are compatibility issues with Python 3.4 I'm guessing its not.

[acolytec3]

Here's the official write-up on the changes from the old library.

Based on reading the docs, the only change that's pertinent for how gitcoin uses IPFS is the connect method and I've updated that to match the new structure in both of the places in the code where it's called.

The other functions from the library that are used (cat, get_json, add_json) appear to be unchanged.

I'll look at writing some tests for those specific utils methods where connect is used.

[acolytec3]

@danlipert I added tests for both of the dashboard utility methods that call ipfs. Let me know if this is what you're looking for.

And don't mind my complete ineptitude at squashing commits. ^^;;

[danlipert]

@acolytec3 Looks good! Did you try running the app locally and interacting with IPFS via the backend?

[acolytec3]

Ah, got it. Let me rebuild that branch when I have a chance and I'll check and confirm.

…

On Sat, Jun 22, 2019, 10:58 AM KuhnChris ***@***.***> wrote: ***@***.**** commented on this pull request. ------------------------------ In app/dashboard/utils.py <#4552 (comment)>: > @@ -187,7 +187,8 @@ def get_ipfs(host=None, port=settings.IPFS_API_PORT): Args: host (str): The IPFS host to connect to. - Defaults to environment variable: IPFS_HOST. + Defaults to environment variable: IPFS_HOST. The host name should be of the form 'ipfs.infura.io' and not êasiest would be to check if the bounty/kudos/grant has a properly filled ipfs link - if that's the case and it's openable via ipfs.infura.io then it's fine. — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#4552?email_source=notifications&email_token=AEENFXAVT6PJ6IF3SWWPDE3P3Y4ZZA5CNFSM4HR4L542YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFWFIHK3DMKJSXC5LFON2FEZLWNFSXPKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOB4K7PMQ#discussion_r296448104>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AEENFXFINH6BWUIWINMOPLLP3Y4ZZANCNFSM4HR4L54Q> .

[acolytec3]

@danlipert @octavioamu @thelostone-mc @owocki Hi all, what's the status on this one? Are there more tests or validations you're looking for to close this out?

[owocki]

quick question.. are PRs that are approved included in releases automatically, or is there some other inclusion metric?

[danlipert]

quick question.. are PRs that are approved included in releases automatically, or is there some other inclusion metric?

Once they are approved by each engineer, then the final approving engineer usually merges it. Sometimes we save merging until before the deploy in case there are conflicts, especially with migrations.

@thelostone-mc @octavioamu this look good to y'all?

[acolytec3]

What about this one? Is it good to go? Would love to get paid if it's done. 😬

[octavioamu]

LGTM

[kuhnchris]

LGTM too - works locally at least