refactor server.py for using Blueprint#3033
Conversation
ReimarBauer
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That's good progress. We can already see it's becoming much more readable. You need to rearrange a few things.
The blueprints should contain as few additional functions as possible.
Especially not ones that need to be imported from other blueprints.
see comments
efd14d0 to
570f809
Compare
Prompt:Perform a senior developer like review of the current branch in relation to origin/develop. Take into account a former review contained in review.md related to commit ee1d8b4.Split review results in general comments, security related issues, performance issues, and logic/algorithmic issues. Result:General comments
Security-related issues
Performance issues
Logic / algorithmic issues
except (email_validator.exceptions.EmailSyntaxError or email_validator.exceptions.EmailUndeliverableError):
except (email_validator.exceptions.EmailSyntaxError,
if 'auth' not in APP.blueprints:
DOCS_SERVER_PATH = os.path.dirname(os.path.abspath(mslib.file)) # .../mslib
Summary verdict The architecture moves are mostly the right direction — blueprints, decoupled mslib.utils.auth, app.extensions for managers — and several critical bugs from the previous review are genuinely fixed (SAML2 routing via record_once, top-level MSColab coupling). However, three of the previous review's items have been "fixed" in a way that is itself broken:
and a regression was introduced in basic-HTTP-auth wiring across blueprints (security #1). Those four should block merge. The rest are quality issues that can land in a follow-up. |
|
wms and mscolab do have to use two different HTTPBasicAuth. They should not depent on each other. |
…asic_auth'] (does not work at the moment)
Purpose of PR?:
Fixes #2081
Does this PR introduce a breaking change?
included Blueprint, fixed test_load_no_file
If the changes in this PR are manually verified, list down the scenarios covered::
tests succeed, not manually verified
Additional information for reviewer? :
Mention if this PR is part of any design or a continuation of previous PRs
Does this PR results in some Documentation changes?
If yes, include the list of Documentation changes
Checklist:
<type>: <subject>