Skip to content

Sync Molnix appraisals and appraisers#2670

Merged
szabozoltan69 merged 10 commits into
developfrom
feature/molnix-appraisals-and-resp-cap
May 20, 2026
Merged

Sync Molnix appraisals and appraisers#2670
szabozoltan69 merged 10 commits into
developfrom
feature/molnix-appraisals-and-resp-cap

Conversation

@szabozoltan69
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@szabozoltan69 szabozoltan69 commented Feb 25, 2026

Refers to #2633 and to #2732

@szabozoltan69 szabozoltan69 force-pushed the feature/molnix-appraisals-and-resp-cap branch 4 times, most recently from 37b7437 to bf57818 Compare February 27, 2026 09:59
@szabozoltan69 szabozoltan69 force-pushed the feature/molnix-appraisals-and-resp-cap branch 2 times, most recently from 6a91e70 to b77839c Compare February 27, 2026 13:28
@szabozoltan69 szabozoltan69 force-pushed the feature/molnix-appraisals-and-resp-cap branch from b77839c to a7f5440 Compare March 26, 2026 11:12
@szabozoltan69 szabozoltan69 force-pushed the feature/molnix-appraisals-and-resp-cap branch 4 times, most recently from d23d5da to 9879a01 Compare April 15, 2026 09:29
@szabozoltan69 szabozoltan69 force-pushed the develop branch 2 times, most recently from 3ec10a5 to 8923dcf Compare April 17, 2026 11:21
@szabozoltan69 szabozoltan69 force-pushed the feature/molnix-appraisals-and-resp-cap branch from 9879a01 to 613a8e5 Compare April 28, 2026 08:01
@szabozoltan69 szabozoltan69 force-pushed the feature/molnix-appraisals-and-resp-cap branch from 613a8e5 to e30d37c Compare May 11, 2026 15:40
@szabozoltan69 szabozoltan69 marked this pull request as ready for review May 12, 2026 09:00
@szabozoltan69 szabozoltan69 changed the title Sync Molnix appraisals – v0.1 Sync Molnix appraisals and appraisers May 12, 2026
@szabozoltan69 szabozoltan69 requested review from batpad and susilnem May 12, 2026 09:38
@arunissun
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@szabozoltan69
In api/management/commands/sync_molnix_appraisals.py, please check the block around lines 559-615. It looks like for appraisal in appraisals: starts correctly, but the actual normalize_appraisal(...) write logic and the nested appraiser handling are outside that loop, so the code appears to process only the last appraisal on each page and only that last appraisal’s appraisers. The ticket expects one row per appraisal and the full child set from appraisal.appraisers[], so could you please verify the indentation/control flow,
let me know if I am missing something

@szabozoltan69 szabozoltan69 force-pushed the feature/molnix-appraisals-and-resp-cap branch from fb30466 to f42c8e3 Compare May 20, 2026 11:28
@szabozoltan69
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

szabozoltan69 commented May 20, 2026

...please check the block around lines 559-615

Good one, @arunissun – I fixed the loop indentation and pushed the change.

@szabozoltan69 szabozoltan69 force-pushed the feature/molnix-appraisals-and-resp-cap branch from f42c8e3 to 66feb0b Compare May 20, 2026 11:32
@arunissun
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@szabozoltan69
Please could you confirm whether duplicate rrms_event_participation rows on rerun are expected by design? In sync_molnix_appraisals.py, the event participation records are written with create(), and the uniqueness constraint was removed in migration 0095_molnix_appraisal_appraised_person_and_event_participation_constraint.py. So if the sync is run again on the same source data, it looks like the same (event_id, person_id, role) participation row could be inserted again instead of being updated or skipped. If that behavior is intentional, then this point is fine from my side or I am missing anything ,

no more issues identified and you can merge the PR

@szabozoltan69
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@arunissun You were right about duplicates. I solved it via this commit: "Update RRMS event participation to upsert and log create/update counts".

@szabozoltan69 szabozoltan69 merged commit 038d7f8 into develop May 20, 2026
3 checks passed
@szabozoltan69 szabozoltan69 deleted the feature/molnix-appraisals-and-resp-cap branch May 20, 2026 14:26
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