Skip to content

Fix falsy 0 check, use testing config everywhere #25

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

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 18, 2025

Conversation

shreyav
Copy link
Contributor

@shreyav shreyav commented Mar 17, 2025

No description provided.

@shreyav shreyav marked this pull request as ready for review March 17, 2025 21:52
Copy link
Contributor Author

shreyav commented Mar 17, 2025

This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking.

@shreyav shreyav force-pushed the 03-17-fix_falsy_0_check branch from f8d4f39 to 41f6d8b Compare March 17, 2025 21:57
@shreyav shreyav changed the title Fix falsy 0 check Fix falsy 0 check, use testing config everywhere Mar 17, 2025
@shreyav shreyav requested a review from jklein24 March 17, 2025 22:02
@@ -472,7 +475,9 @@ def _handle_internal_uma_payreq(
)

print(f"payreq_response: {payreq_response.to_dict()}")
if uma_version == 1:
# Skip signature verification in testing mode to avoid needing to run 2 VASPs.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can you remind me of the details on this one? Don't we already run 2 vasps in each test case? Where does this break down?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

this is unrelated to the tests! only line 524 is related

I added this for consistency because some of the signature validation steps use this config and some dont

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

hmm... I totally don't remember why we need that 🤔

@shreyav shreyav merged commit a5b0831 into main Mar 18, 2025
2 checks passed
@shreyav shreyav deleted the 03-17-fix_falsy_0_check branch March 18, 2025 07:34
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants