Skip to content

LG-12321: Log TrueIDResponse Identifiers for Troubleshooting#10118

Merged
charleyf merged 9 commits intomainfrom
charley/lg-12321-log-trueid-identifiers
Feb 28, 2024
Merged

LG-12321: Log TrueIDResponse Identifiers for Troubleshooting#10118
charleyf merged 9 commits intomainfrom
charley/lg-12321-log-trueid-identifiers

Conversation

@charleyf
Copy link
Contributor

@charleyf charleyf commented Feb 20, 2024

🎫 Ticket

https://cm-jira.usa.gov/browse/LG-12321

🛠 Summary of changes

Add the various TrueIDResponse identifiers to the successful result. This was much easier because we were already logging them for the failed result.

📜 Testing Plan

  • Go through IDV past the front/back/selfie step.
  • Review the logs for the 'IdV: doc auth image upload vendor submitted' event.
  • That event should have a request_id field if this PR worked.
  • In staging, that request ID field should have a value (probably a long number).

@charleyf charleyf changed the title Add logging and fix tests LG-12321: Log TrueIDResponse Identifiers for Troubleshooting TrueID Errors Feb 20, 2024
@charleyf charleyf changed the title LG-12321: Log TrueIDResponse Identifiers for Troubleshooting TrueID Errors LG-12321: Log TrueIDResponse Identifiers for Troubleshooting Feb 20, 2024
vendor:,
conversation_id:,
reference_id:,
reference:,
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This seems weird to me, I suspect I should either remove this or use it?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hmm I'm not quite sure I understand your question.

My understanding is that this file is mostly for documentation. So including this here is a way of calling it out instead of just passing it through **extra. Maybe that's not helpful to your question though.

I am actually surprised it would just be this one event changed though. With it being included on extra_attributes it seems like other events might now have this as well.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hm, well the A/C only mentions this one event. Agreed that it's probably available for other events too.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Oh sorry I think I wasn't clear - I thought maybe the it was being included in other events on accident. But I just ran through it and didn't see it in other events. So I think it was just me misunderstanding the scope of the code changes. I think only including it on this event is the right choice given the ticket.

@charleyf charleyf marked this pull request as ready for review February 21, 2024 14:06
@charleyf charleyf requested review from a team and amirbey and removed request for a team February 21, 2024 14:06
Copy link
Contributor

@night-jellyfish night-jellyfish left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I ran through the test changes and it all worked as expected!

I think one possible change could be including it in the MockProofer - right now the request_id is null no matter success or failure locally. But I don't think that's blocking this work.

@charleyf charleyf merged commit e89d68d into main Feb 28, 2024
@charleyf charleyf deleted the charley/lg-12321-log-trueid-identifiers branch February 28, 2024 17:47
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