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

refactor(jinja macro): Update current_user_roles() macro to fetch roles from existing get_user_roles() method #32888

Merged

Conversation

bmaquet
Copy link
Contributor

@bmaquet bmaquet commented Mar 27, 2025

SUMMARY

I recently added a new Jinja macro current_user_roles() in #32770
In this PR I added a new function get_user_roles() in core.py to get the roles of the logged-in user.

However I noticed today there's already a get_user_roles() method defined in superset/security/manager.py [source].

I'm proposing a small refactor to rely on the existing method instead of the new method I introduced in #32770.

TESTING INSTRUCTIONS

I've updated the unit tests accordingly, so they should pass

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

  • Has associated issue:
  • Required feature flags:
  • Changes UI
  • Includes DB Migration (follow approval process in SIP-59)
    • Migration is atomic, supports rollback & is backwards-compatible
    • Confirm DB migration upgrade and downgrade tested
    • Runtime estimates and downtime expectations provided
  • Introduces new feature or API
  • Removes existing feature or API

@dosubot dosubot bot added the global:jinja Related to Jinja templating label Mar 27, 2025
Copy link

@korbit-ai korbit-ai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I've completed my review and didn't find any issues.

Files scanned
File Path Reviewed
superset/jinja_context.py
superset/utils/core.py

Explore our documentation to understand the languages and file types we support and the files we ignore.

Need a new review? Comment /korbit-review on this PR and I'll review your latest changes.

Korbit Guide: Usage and Customization

Interacting with Korbit

  • You can manually ask Korbit to review your PR using the /korbit-review command in a comment at the root of your PR.
  • You can ask Korbit to generate a new PR description using the /korbit-generate-pr-description command in any comment on your PR.
  • Too many Korbit comments? I can resolve all my comment threads if you use the /korbit-resolve command in any comment on your PR.
  • On any given comment that Korbit raises on your pull request, you can have a discussion with Korbit by replying to the comment.
  • Help train Korbit to improve your reviews by giving a 👍 or 👎 on the comments Korbit posts.

Customizing Korbit

  • Check out our docs on how you can make Korbit work best for you and your team.
  • Customize Korbit for your organization through the Korbit Console.

Current Korbit Configuration

General Settings
Setting Value
Review Schedule Automatic excluding drafts
Max Issue Count 10
Automatic PR Descriptions
Issue Categories
Category Enabled
Documentation
Logging
Error Handling
Readability
Design
Performance
Security
Functionality

Feedback and Support

Note

Korbit Pro is free for open source projects 🎉

Looking to add Korbit to your team? Get started with a free 2 week trial here

Copy link

codecov bot commented Mar 27, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 83.41%. Comparing base (76d897e) to head (c80cc2a).
Report is 1695 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           master   #32888       +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage   60.48%   83.41%   +22.92%     
===========================================
  Files        1931      549     -1382     
  Lines       76236    39486    -36750     
  Branches     8568        0     -8568     
===========================================
- Hits        46114    32938    -13176     
+ Misses      28017     6548    -21469     
+ Partials     2105        0     -2105     
Flag Coverage Δ
hive 48.39% <14.28%> (-0.76%) ⬇️
javascript ?
mysql 75.64% <57.14%> (?)
postgres 75.71% <57.14%> (?)
presto 52.88% <14.28%> (-0.92%) ⬇️
python 83.41% <100.00%> (+19.91%) ⬆️
sqlite 75.20% <57.14%> (?)
unit 61.45% <100.00%> (+3.82%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

@justinpark justinpark added the review:checkpoint Last PR reviewed during the daily review standup label Mar 27, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

@Vitor-Avila Vitor-Avila left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM!

@sadpandajoe sadpandajoe merged commit 174750c into apache:master Mar 29, 2025
44 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
global:jinja Related to Jinja templating review:checkpoint Last PR reviewed during the daily review standup size/M
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants