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

Praser.py: payload_config selection behaviour in the case of expired flight doc #320

Open
rossengeorgiev opened this issue Jul 9, 2014 · 1 comment

Comments

@rossengeorgiev
Copy link
Member

Reading parser.py, specifically the _find_config_doc(self, callsign) routine. It's tried to first find a flight doc, but if the flight doc has expired it looks for the latest payload_config containing the callsign. However, a issue arises, when the fligh doc has expired during a flight in progress, where the flight doc is using a older payload_config, while newer payload_config exists.

config = self.db.view(

The last part of the routine, would always select the newest payload_config and attempt to parse data with it. If the format is different, it would fail to parse the flight as it happened to SP3OJ's flight.

My question is, should habitat instead select the latest flight containing the callsign and use the payload_config off of that or should users recreate the payload config for each flight, even if it's a duplicate?

@adamgreig
Copy link
Member

Going for old but approved flight docs might make sense before looking for latest payload docs (which we'd still do as a final fallback if no flight docs have the payload).

The problem here is that if you want to test a new payload config document, your old flight document will always take precedence -- so you could never test a new payload on the same callsign without making (and having approved) a flight for it.

On balance it seems like helping users whose flight docs have expired is less useful than preventing testing. Can anyone think of a way around that?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants