🎨 Enhance study cloning endpoint to allow modifying title, description, hidden

[bisgaard-itis]

What do these changes do?

• Add an optional body to the POST /studies/{study_id}:clone endpoint in the api-server to support modifing the description and title of the cloned study.
• @pcrespov if you prefer I could instead allow the users to do this via the POST studies/{study_id}/jobs endpoint. This would mirror what we do for the Program section of the api-server. I think it is better to support this in a POST endpoint where we are anyway cloning the project to not open the door to people modifying already existing projects. But I am happy to change this if there are concerns it conceptually doesn't fit with the :clone

Related issue/s

• https://github.com/ITISFoundation/private-issues/issues/191

How to test

Dev-ops

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 66.14%. Comparing base (522bfc6) to head (d5c9220).
Report is 1 commits behind head on master.

❗ There is a different number of reports uploaded between BASE (522bfc6) and HEAD (d5c9220). Click for more details.

HEAD has 32 uploads less than BASE

Flag	BASE (522bfc6)	HEAD (d5c9220)
unittests	32	1
integrationtests	6	5

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #7892       +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage   87.94%   66.14%   -21.81%     
===========================================
  Files        1845      795     -1050     
  Lines       71141    36456    -34685     
  Branches     1220      176     -1044     
===========================================
- Hits        62565    24112    -38453     
- Misses       8224    12286     +4062     
+ Partials      352       58      -294     

Flag	Coverage Δ
integrationtests	60.45% <ø> (-3.79%)	⬇️
unittests	91.85% <100.00%> (+5.33%)	⬆️

Components	Coverage Δ
api	∅ <ø> (∅)
pkg_aws_library	∅ <ø> (∅)
pkg_dask_task_models_library	∅ <ø> (∅)
pkg_models_library	∅ <ø> (∅)
pkg_notifications_library	∅ <ø> (∅)
pkg_postgres_database	∅ <ø> (∅)
pkg_service_integration	∅ <ø> (∅)
pkg_service_library	∅ <ø> (∅)
pkg_settings_library	∅ <ø> (∅)
pkg_simcore_sdk	77.16% <ø> (-7.95%)	⬇️
agent	∅ <ø> (∅)
api_server	91.85% <100.00%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
autoscaling	∅ <ø> (∅)
catalog	∅ <ø> (∅)
clusters_keeper	∅ <ø> (∅)
dask_sidecar	∅ <ø> (∅)
datcore_adapter	∅ <ø> (∅)
director	∅ <ø> (∅)
director_v2	60.11% <ø> (-31.00%)	⬇️
dynamic_scheduler	∅ <ø> (∅)
dynamic_sidecar	88.33% <ø> (-1.77%)	⬇️
efs_guardian	∅ <ø> (∅)
invitations	∅ <ø> (∅)
payments	∅ <ø> (∅)
resource_usage_tracker	∅ <ø> (∅)
storage	∅ <ø> (∅)
webclient	∅ <ø> (∅)
webserver	58.98% <ø> (-28.49%)	⬇️

---

Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 522bfc6...d5c9220. Read the comment docs.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[pcrespov]

Thx

[pcrespov]

• @pcrespov if you prefer I could instead allow the users to do this via the POST studies/{study_id}/jobs endpoint. This would mirror what we do for the Program section of the api-server. I think it is better to support this in a POST endpoint where we are anyway cloning the project to not open the door to people modifying already existing projects. But I am happy to change this if there are concerns it conceptually doesn't fit with the :clone

I am not sure how POST studies/{study_id}/jobs endpoint would help here. You mean POST functions/{functions}/jobs/{job_id}:clone endpoint?

In any case, I am ok with it. As I mentioned aboe, this is a "clone and optionally update"

[bisgaard-itis]

• @pcrespov if you prefer I could instead allow the users to do this via the POST studies/{study_id}/jobs endpoint. This would mirror what we do for the Program section of the api-server. I think it is better to support this in a POST endpoint where we are anyway cloning the project to not open the door to people modifying already existing projects. But I am happy to change this if there are concerns it conceptually doesn't fit with the :clone

I am not sure how POST studies/{study_id}/jobs endpoint would help here. You mean POST functions/{functions}/jobs/{job_id}:clone endpoint?

In any case, I am ok with it. As I mentioned aboe, this is a "clone and optionally update"

@pcrespov, right, I am thinking if POST functions/{functions}/jobs/{job_id}:expose would be a good way to go, to indicate a single endpoint for "exposing" a study job in the frontend. What do you think?

[bisgaard-itis]

@Mergifyio queue

[mergify]

queue

🟠 Waiting for conditions to match

• -closed [📌 queue requirement]
• -conflict [📌 queue requirement]
• -draft [📌 queue requirement]
• any of: [📌 queue -> configuration change requirements]
  • -mergify-configuration-changed
  • check-success = Configuration changed
• any of: [🔀 queue conditions]
  • all of: [📌 queue conditions of queue default]
    • #approved-reviews-by >= 2 [🛡 GitHub branch protection]
    • #approved-reviews-by>=2
    • #changes-requested-reviews-by = 0 [🛡 GitHub branch protection]
    • #changes-requested-reviews-by=0
    • #review-threads-unresolved = 0 [🛡 GitHub branch protection]
    • #review-threads-unresolved=0
    • -conflict
    • -draft
    • base=master
    • branch-protection-review-decision = APPROVED [🛡 GitHub branch protection]
    • label!=🤖-do-not-merge
    • label=🤖-automerge
    • any of: [🛡 GitHub branch protection]
      • check-skipped = deploy to dockerhub
      • check-neutral = deploy to dockerhub
      • check-success = deploy to dockerhub
    • any of: [🛡 GitHub branch protection]
      • check-success = system-tests
      • check-neutral = system-tests
      • check-skipped = system-tests
    • any of: [🛡 GitHub branch protection]
      • check-success = unit-tests
      • check-neutral = unit-tests
      • check-skipped = unit-tests
    • any of: [🛡 GitHub branch protection]
      • check-success = check OAS' are up to date
      • check-neutral = check OAS' are up to date
      • check-skipped = check OAS' are up to date
    • any of: [🛡 GitHub branch protection]
      • check-success = integration-tests
      • check-neutral = integration-tests
      • check-skipped = integration-tests
    • any of: [🛡 GitHub branch protection]
      • check-success = build-test-images (frontend) / build-test-images
      • check-neutral = build-test-images (frontend) / build-test-images
      • check-skipped = build-test-images (frontend) / build-test-images

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud