Skip to content

Conversation

AlvaroVega
Copy link
Member

@AlvaroVega AlvaroVega commented Dec 4, 2020

Introduced by #947

All these CI test are failing:

>>> features.TS02_iotaflows.004_iotajsonhttp2cb.IOT-iota004 IOTA_JSON with HTTP binding to CB through IOTA.SC_1 Simple measure received thought IOTA_JSON and HTTP binding -- @1.1 2 min 17 sec 3
>>> features.TS02_iotaflows.004_iotajsonhttp2cb.IOT-iota004 IOTA_JSON with HTTP binding to CB through IOTA.SC_1 Simple measure received thought IOTA_JSON and HTTP binding -- @1.2 2 min 19 sec 3
>>> features.TS02_iotaflows.004_iotajsonhttp2cb.IOT-iota004 IOTA_JSON with HTTP binding to CB through IOTA.SC_1 Simple measure received thought IOTA_JSON and HTTP binding -- @1.3 2 min 21 sec 3
>>> features.TS02_iotaflows.004_iotajsonhttp2cb.IOT-iota004 IOTA_JSON with HTTP binding to CB through IOTA.SC_1 Simple measure received thought IOTA_JSON and HTTP binding -- @1.4 2 min 30 sec 3
>>> features.TS02_iotaflows.004_iotajsonhttp2cb.IOT-iota004 IOTA_JSON with HTTP binding to CB through IOTA.SC_2 Multiple measure received thought IOTA_JSON and HTTP binding -- @1.1 2 min 27 sec 3
>>> features.TS02_iotaflows.004_iotajsonhttp2cb.IOT-iota004 IOTA_JSON with HTTP binding to CB through IOTA.SC_2 Multiple measure received thought IOTA_JSON and HTTP binding -- @1.2 2 min 33 sec 3
>>> features.TS02_iotaflows.004_iotajsonhttp2cb.IOT-iota004 IOTA_JSON with HTTP binding to CB through IOTA.SC_2 Multiple measure received thought IOTA_JSON and HTTP binding -- @1.3 2 min 17 sec 3
>>> features.TS02_iotaflows.004_iotajsonhttp2cb.IOT-iota004 IOTA_JSON with HTTP binding to CB through IOTA.SC_2 Multiple measure received thought IOTA_JSON and HTTP binding -- @1.4 2 min 52 sec 3
>>> features.TS02_iotaflows.001_iotaulhttp2cb.IOT-iota001 IOTA_UL with HTTP binding to CB through IOTA.SC_1 Simple measure received thought IOTA_UL and HTTP binding -- @1.1 2 min 34 sec 3
>>> features.TS02_iotaflows.001_iotaulhttp2cb.IOT-iota001 IOTA_UL with HTTP binding to CB through IOTA.SC_1 Simple measure received thought IOTA_UL and HTTP binding -- @1.2 2 min 12 sec 3
>>> features.TS02_iotaflows.001_iotaulhttp2cb.IOT-iota001 IOTA_UL with HTTP binding to CB through IOTA.SC_1 Simple measure received thought IOTA_UL and HTTP binding -- @1.3 2 min 23 sec 3
>>> features.TS02_iotaflows.001_iotaulhttp2cb.IOT-iota001 IOTA_UL with HTTP binding to CB through IOTA.SC_1 Simple measure received thought IOTA_UL and HTTP binding -- @1.4 2 min 16 sec 3
>>> features.TS02_iotaflows.001_iotaulhttp2cb.IOT-iota001 IOTA_UL with HTTP binding to CB through IOTA.SC_2 Multiple measure received thought IOTA_UL and HTTP binding -- @1.1 2 min 15 sec 3
>>> features.TS02_iotaflows.001_iotaulhttp2cb.IOT-iota001 IOTA_UL with HTTP binding to CB through IOTA.SC_2 Multiple measure received thought IOTA_UL and HTTP binding -- @1.2 2 min 22 sec 3
>>> features.TS02_iotaflows.001_iotaulhttp2cb.IOT-iota001 IOTA_UL with HTTP binding to CB through IOTA.SC_2 Multiple measure received thought IOTA_UL and HTTP binding -- @1.3 2 min 14 sec 3
>>> features.TS02_iotaflows.001_iotaulhttp2cb.IOT-iota001 IOTA_UL with HTTP binding to CB through IOTA.SC_2 Multiple measure received thought IOTA_UL and HTTP binding -- @1.4
iot-iota-ul                 | time=2020-12-04T09:53:11.185Z | lvl=FATAL | corr=n/a | trans=n/a | op=IoTAgentNGSI.Global | from=n/a | srv=n/a | subsrv=n/a | msg=An unexpected exception has been raised. Ignoring: TypeError: iotAgentLib.configModule.checkNgsi2 is not a function | comp=IoTAgent

Used by current iotas (ul, json...)
Backward compatibility is a must.

@AlvaroVega AlvaroVega requested a review from fgalan December 4, 2020 10:13
Copy link
Member

@fgalan fgalan left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@fgalan fgalan merged commit 384f1ea into master Dec 4, 2020
@fgalan fgalan deleted the fix/revert_check_ngsi2_function branch December 4, 2020 10:49
@AlvaroVega AlvaroVega mentioned this pull request Dec 9, 2020
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