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

Allow core to mark addons as system managed #5145

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Aug 13, 2024
Merged

Conversation

mdegat01
Copy link
Contributor

@mdegat01 mdegat01 commented Jun 21, 2024

Proposed change

Allow Home Assistant to mark addons as system managed when an integration is handling installation and updates for it.

Type of change

  • Dependency upgrade
  • Bugfix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (which adds functionality to the supervisor)
  • Breaking change (fix/feature causing existing functionality to break)
  • Code quality improvements to existing code or addition of tests

Additional information

Checklist

  • The code change is tested and works locally.
  • Local tests pass. Your PR cannot be merged unless tests pass
  • There is no commented out code in this PR.
  • I have followed the development checklist
  • The code has been formatted using Ruff (ruff format supervisor tests)
  • Tests have been added to verify that the new code works.

If API endpoints of add-on configuration are added/changed:

Summary by CodeRabbit

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • New Features

    • Introduced system management attributes for Home Assistant add-ons, enhancing configuration capabilities and status tracking.
  • Tests

    • Added tests to verify the system-managed status of add-ons, ensuring accurate status changes and reversion handling.

@mdegat01 mdegat01 added the new-feature A new feature label Jun 21, 2024
Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Jun 21, 2024

Warning

Rate limit exceeded

@mdegat01 has exceeded the limit for the number of commits or files that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait 28 minutes and 33 seconds before requesting another review.

How to resolve this issue?

After the wait time has elapsed, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit.

How do rate limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization.

Our paid plans have higher rate limits than the trial, open-source and free plans. In all cases, we re-allow further reviews after a brief timeout.

Please see our FAQ for further information.

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between ca213cc and 86dc0cf.

Walkthrough

Walkthrough

This update enhances Home Assistant’s addon management system by introducing new attributes and properties specifically for system-managed addons. The changes span multiple files, adding these attributes to relevant classes, functions, and validation scripts, while also introducing tests to ensure the correct functionality and state management of addons.

Changes

Files Change Summary
supervisor/addons/addon.py, supervisor/addons/validate.py, supervisor/api/addons.py Introduced ATTR_SYSTEM_MANAGED and ATTR_SYSTEM_MANAGED_CONFIG_ENTRY attributes to the Addon class, validation schema, and various API methods, enhancing addon management capabilities.
supervisor/const.py Added constants ATTR_SYSTEM_MANAGED and ATTR_SYSTEM_MANAGED_CONFIG_ENTRY.
tests/api/test_addons.py Implemented test_api_addon_system_managed to validate the behavior of the system-managed attribute for addons, ensuring state changes are logged and verified.

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

Share
Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table.
    • @coderabbitai show all the console.log statements in this repository.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (invoked as PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Additionally, you can add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 1

@mdegat01
Copy link
Contributor Author

Normally when the API is updated with something new in a non-GET method we also update the CLI. However in this case I think we should skip that. I see no valid use case to allowing CLI users to mark an addon as system managed, this option is only for Home Assistant to use via the API.

Copy link

There hasn't been any activity on this pull request recently. This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because of that and will be closed if no further activity occurs within 7 days.
Thank you for your contributions.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the stale label Jul 27, 2024
Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 1

Outside diff range, codebase verification and nitpick comments (1)
supervisor/addons/addon.py (1)

368-398: Consider documenting the new properties in the class docstring.

Adding system_managed and system_managed_config_entry to the class docstring would improve readability and maintainability.

Comment on lines 291 to 348
async def test_api_addon_system_managed(
api_client: TestClient,
coresys: CoreSys,
install_addon_example: Addon,
caplog: pytest.LogCaptureFixture,
tmp_supervisor_data,
path_extern,
):
"""Test setting system managed for an addon."""
install_addon_example.data["ingress"] = False

# Not system managed
resp = await api_client.get("/addons")
body = await resp.json()
assert body["data"]["addons"][0]["slug"] == "local_example"
assert body["data"]["addons"][0]["system_managed"] is False

resp = await api_client.get("/addons/local_example/info")
body = await resp.json()
assert body["data"]["system_managed"] is False
assert body["data"]["system_managed_config_entry"] is None

# Mark as system managed
coresys.addons.data.save_data.reset_mock()
resp = await api_client.post(
"/addons/local_example/options",
json={"system_managed": True, "system_managed_config_entry": "abc123"},
)
assert resp.status == 200
coresys.addons.data.save_data.assert_called_once()

resp = await api_client.get("/addons")
body = await resp.json()
assert body["data"]["addons"][0]["system_managed"] is True

resp = await api_client.get("/addons/local_example/info")
body = await resp.json()
assert body["data"]["system_managed"] is True
assert body["data"]["system_managed_config_entry"] == "abc123"

# Revert. Log that cannot have a config entry if not system managed
coresys.addons.data.save_data.reset_mock()
resp = await api_client.post(
"/addons/local_example/options",
json={"system_managed": False, "system_managed_config_entry": "abc123"},
)
assert resp.status == 200
coresys.addons.data.save_data.assert_called_once()
assert "Ignoring system managed config entry" in caplog.text

resp = await api_client.get("/addons")
body = await resp.json()
assert body["data"]["addons"][0]["system_managed"] is False

resp = await api_client.get("/addons/local_example/info")
body = await resp.json()
assert body["data"]["system_managed"] is False
assert body["data"]["system_managed_config_entry"] is None
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Comprehensive Testing of System Managed Addons

The test function test_api_addon_system_managed is well-structured and covers multiple scenarios, including setting an addon as system-managed and reverting it. The usage of reset_mock and assert_called_once ensures that changes are being tracked correctly. However, consider adding more edge cases, such as attempting to set invalid values for system_managed and system_managed_config_entry.

Would you like me to help by adding these additional test cases?

@github-actions github-actions bot removed the stale label Jul 27, 2024
@agners agners marked this pull request as draft July 30, 2024 14:41
@mdegat01 mdegat01 force-pushed the system-managed-addons branch from fc65c8b to 86dc0cf Compare July 30, 2024 19:45
@mdegat01 mdegat01 marked this pull request as ready for review July 30, 2024 19:55
@mdegat01 mdegat01 requested a review from agners July 30, 2024 19:55
@pvizeli pvizeli self-requested a review August 7, 2024 13:51
@agners agners merged commit eb3986b into main Aug 13, 2024
19 checks passed
@agners agners deleted the system-managed-addons branch August 13, 2024 13:14
@github-actions github-actions bot locked and limited conversation to collaborators Aug 15, 2024
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants