Differential D4737 Diff 16788 swh/deposit/cli/client.py

Changeset View

Standalone View

swh/deposit/cli/client.py

Show First 20 Lines • Show All 480 Lines • ▼ Show 20 Lines	def print_result(data: Dict[str, Any], output_format: Optional[str]) -> None:
import yaml		import yaml

if output_format == "json":		if output_format == "json":
click.echo(json.dumps(data))		click.echo(json.dumps(data))
elif output_format == "yaml":		elif output_format == "yaml":
click.echo(yaml.dump(data))		click.echo(yaml.dump(data))
else:		else:
logger.info(data)		logger.info(data)


		@deposit.command("metadata-only")
		@click.option(
		"--url",
		default="https://deposit.softwareheritage.org",
		help="(Optional) Deposit server api endpoint. By default, "
		"https://deposit.softwareheritage.org/1",
		)
		@click.option("--username", required=True, help="(Mandatory) User's name")
		@click.option(
		"--password", required=True, help="(Mandatory) User's associated password"
		ardumontAuthorUnsubmitted Done Inline Actions I really wish we stop doing that redundancy parameter dance in each subcommand... And push it within the scope of the `deposit` command. And even open a `--config-path` (or `--config-file`) as other commands do... Thing is, i don't know how to do that without breaking the current interface the users know... Is deprecating the old ways (--url --username --password) and start pushing for the new ones ok? Any better idea? @vlorentz ^ ardumont: I really wish we stop doing that redundancy parameter dance in each subcommand... And push it…
		vlorentzUnsubmitted Not Done Inline Actions Yes. You canalso use a decorator, to deduplicate: def authenticator_decorator(f): f = click.option("--username", required=True, help="(Mandatory) User's name")(f) f = click.option( "--password", required=True, help="(Mandatory) User's associated password" )(f) return f vlorentz: Yes. You canalso use a decorator, to deduplicate: ``` def authenticator_decorator(f): f =…
		ardumontAuthorUnsubmitted Done Inline Actions Thanks, that's a more dry step. I still wish we stop duplicating those flags though. ardumont: Thanks, that's a more dry step. I still wish we stop duplicating those flags though.
		ardumontAuthorUnsubmitted Done Inline Actions As a first step D4748. ardumont: As a first step D4748.
		)
		@click.option(
		"--metadata",
		"metadata_path",
		type=click.Path(exists=True),
		required=True,
		help="Path to xml metadata file",
		)
		@click.option(
		"-f",
		"--format",
		"output_format",
		default="logging",
		type=click.Choice(["logging", "yaml", "json"]),
		help="Output format results.",
		)
		@click.pass_context
		def metadata_only(ctx, url, username, password, metadata_path, output_format):
		"""Deposit metadata only upload

		"""
		from swh.deposit.client import PublicApiDepositClient
		from swh.deposit.utils import parse_swh_reference, parse_xml

		# Parse to check for a swhid presence within the metadata file
		with open(metadata_path, "r") as f:
		metadata_raw = f.read()
		actual_swhid = parse_swh_reference(parse_xml(metadata_raw))

		if not actual_swhid:
		raise InputError("A SWHID must be provided for a metadata-only deposit")

		with trap_and_report_exceptions():
		client = PublicApiDepositClient(url=_url(url), auth=(username, password))
		collection = _collection(client)
		result = client.deposit_metadata_only(collection, metadata_path)

		print_result(result, output_format)
		ardumontAuthorUnsubmitted Done Inline Actions This will be dealt with in another diff [1] [1] D4738 ardumont: This will be dealt with in another diff [1] [1] D4738
		ardumontAuthorUnsubmitted Done Inline Actions Is that reasonable at all? (instead of mutating the user's file, i can also copy it in temporary location, i still don't know if the overall approach is sound though) ardumont: Is that reasonable at all? (instead of mutating the user's file, i can also copy it in…