asf-tooling commented on issue #785:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/tooling-trusted-releases/issues/785#issuecomment-4410097509
<!-- gofannon-issue-triage-bot v2 -->
**Automated triage** — analyzed at `main@2da7807a`
**Type:** `discussion` • **Classification:** `no_action` •
**Confidence:** `high` • ⚠️ **Stale — consider closing**
**Application domain(s):** `web_api_infrastructure`, `shared_infrastructure`
### Summary
Issue #785 originally proposed separating test routes into their own
blueprint, but @sbp concluded (2026-03-12) that this should NOT be done because
it would require replicating custom typed decorators with tiny differences that
could diverge from production code. @dave2wave then renamed the issue to 'Tidy
test route blueprints' and later asked (2026-03-19) 'Is there anything to do?
All of the test endpoints use @get.typed or @post.typed.' — implying the work
is already complete. Code inspection confirms all test routes in both
atr/get/test.py and atr/post/test.py already use the standard @get.typed and
@post.typed decorators, matching the desired state.
### Where this lives in the code today
#### `atr/get/test.py` — `test_empty` (lines 46-52)
_currently does this_
Test GET route already uses @get.typed decorator — the standard blueprint
decorator for type-safe routes.
```python
@get.typed
async def test_empty(_session: web.Public, _test_empty:
Literal["test/empty"]) -> str:
"""
URL: /test/empty
"""
if config.is_production_mode():
return quart.abort(404)
```
#### `atr/post/test.py` — `test_empty` (lines 30-38)
_currently does this_
Test POST route already uses @post.typed decorator — the standard blueprint
decorator for type-safe routes.
```python
@post.typed
async def test_empty(
_session: web.Public, _test_empty: Literal["test/empty"], _form:
form.Empty
) -> web.WerkzeugResponse:
"""
URL: /test/empty
"""
if config.is_production_mode():
return quart.abort(404)
```
#### `atr/post/test.py` — `test_multiple` (lines 30-38)
_currently does this_
Another test POST route using the standard @post.typed decorator, confirming
all test routes are already consistent.
```python
@post.typed
async def test_multiple(
_session: web.Public, _test_multiple: Literal["test/multiple"],
multiple_form: shared.test.MultipleForm
) -> web.WerkzeugResponse:
"""
URL: /test/multiple
"""
if config.is_production_mode():
return quart.abort(404)
```
#### `atr/blueprints/common.py` — `build_path` (lines 80-87)
_currently does this_
The shared path-building infrastructure used by both @get.typed and
@post.typed — the same code path serves both production and test routes.
```python
def build_path(
func: Callable[..., Any],
) -> tuple[str, list[tuple[str, type]], dict[str, str], tuple[str, type] |
None, bool]:
"""Inspect a function's type hints to build a URL path and a validation
plan.
Accepts URL path params for data, Literal strings for plain URL text,
and Form params for POST bodies
Validates that the session param (web.Committer or web.Public) is first,
and that only one Form param is allowed
"""
```
### Proposed approach
Based on the prior discussion, the team concluded that separating test
routes into their own blueprint is undesirable (@sbp's analysis on 2026-03-12).
@dave2wave's final comment on 2026-03-19 observes that all test endpoints
already use the standard `@get.typed` or `@post.typed` decorators, implying no
further action is needed. Code inspection confirms this: all routes in
`atr/get/test.py` use `@get.typed` and all routes in `atr/post/test.py` use
`@post.typed`. The test routes follow the same patterns as production routes.
There is nothing remaining to tidy.
This issue should be closed as resolved/not-needed.
### Open questions
- Was there any specific 'type safe code' tidying @sbp had in mind in their
comment ('We probably should tidy up the new type safe code at least though'),
or was that addressed separately?
- Should this issue be closed given @dave2wave's last comment implies
nothing is left to do and no one has responded in 50 days?
### Staleness assessment
_opened 72 days ago; last human comment 50 days ago._
Last activity was 50 days ago. The final comment from @dave2wave ('Is there
anything to do? All of the test endpoints use @get.typed or @post.typed')
received no response and effectively concludes that the code is already in the
desired state. The team decided NOT to separate test routes into a new
blueprint, and code inspection confirms all test routes already use the
standard typed decorators. There is no remaining actionable work.
**Recommendation: consider closing this issue.** If the maintainer agrees,
the agent's assessment above provides the rationale to include in a closing
comment.
_The agent reviewed this issue and is not proposing patches in this run.
Review the existing-code citations and open questions above before deciding
next steps._
### Files examined
- `atr/blueprints/__init__.py`
- `atr/post/test.py`
- `atr/shared/test.py`
- `scripts/lint/jinja_route_checker.py`
- `atr/blueprints/api.py`
- `atr/blueprints/common.py`
- `atr/get/test.py`
- `tests/unit/test_blueprints.py`
---
*Draft from a triage agent. A human reviewer should validate before merging
any change. The agent did not run tests or verify diffs apply.*
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
