QA

I just tried it out. I logged in over the browser to https://bugzilla-next.suse.de/ going over the IDP authentication provider, same as we use for IBS. Then over the menues "Preferences", "API KEYS" I generated an API key and called

$ curl -s -H 'Bugzilla_login: okurz@suse.com' -H 'Bugzilla_api_key: XXX' 'https://bugzilla-next.suse.de/jsonrpc.cgi?method=Bug.get&params=%5B%7B%22ids%22%3A+%5B1204372%5D%7D%5D'

and I got

{"error":null,"result":{"faults":[],"bugs":[{"id":1204372,"is_cc_accessible":true,"cf_foundby":"---","product":"openSUSE Distribution","see_also":[],"creator":"caochenzi@163.com","priority":"P5 - None","creation_time":"2022-10-26T11:22:39Z","alias":[],"severity":"Major","flags":[],"blocks":[],"cf_biz_priority":"","component":"Basesystem","resolution":"","is_creator_accessible":true,"qa_contact":"qa-bugs@suse.de","assigned_to":"screening-team-bugs@suse.de","classification":"openSUSE","whiteboard":"","last_change_time":"2022-10-26T11:22:39Z","cf_blocker":"---","cf_marketing_qa_status":"---","dupe_of":null,"summary":"test filing bugs","depends_on":[],"op_sys":"Other","is_open":true,"cc_detail":[],"cc":[],"creator_detail":{"id":91750,"email":"caochenzi@163.com","real_name":"chenzi cao","name":"caochenzi@163.com"},"assigned_to_detail":{"id":87664,"real_name":"E-mail List","email":"screening-team-bugs@suse.de","name":"screening-team-bugs@suse.de"},"version":"Leap 15.3","groups":[],"status":"NEW","qa_contact_detail":{"id":7641,"name":"qa-bugs@suse.de","real_name":"E-mail List","email":"qa-bugs@suse.de"},"url":"","cf_nts_priority":"","platform":"x86-64","is_confirmed":true,"keywords":[],"cf_it_deployment":"---","deadline":null,"target_milestone":"---"}]},"id":"https://bugzilla-next.suse.de/"}

so everything looks good.

For another bug which I could see in the webUI but on the CLI using my API key that failed:

{"error":{"message":"You are not authorized to access bug #1204384. To see this bug, you must first log in to an account with the appropriate permissions.","code":102},"result":null,"id":"https://bugzilla-next.suse.de/"}

Within our code e.g. in github.com/os-autoinst/openqa_review we are passing the "auth" object which includes username and password. Likely we just need to change that part, e.g. see openqa_review/browser.py +139

Thanks Oliver for performing integration smoke test. Sign-off has been planned for end of this week and I confirmed with Cris, that during next week we should get ready for the new login method. This week my goal is to obtain key for openQA

As necessary there is a new user account which we can use, see https://gitlab.suse.de/openqa/password/-/merge_requests/3 for credentials

MTUI has connection to bugzilla using XML-RPC but after removing testopia support from MTUI it now don't use this code

btw -> https://confluence.suse.com/display/LITC/Bugzilla+-+API+access+howto is strongly recommending REST API as XML-RPC is deprecated and JSON-RPC newer got over experimental support

osukup wrote:

btw -> https://confluence.suse.com/display/LITC/Bugzilla+-+API+access+howto is strongly recommending REST API as XML-RPC is deprecated and JSON-RPC newer got over experimental support

I woudn't worry about the experimental status after having used it for so long 😉 The issue with using the new API is that we can't deploy it on the current version, so as a team we decided against doing that until the production instance provides it.

cdywan wrote:

osukup wrote:

btw -> https://confluence.suse.com/display/LITC/Bugzilla+-+API+access+howto is strongly recommending REST API as XML-RPC is deprecated and JSON-RPC newer got over experimental support

I woudn't worry about the experimental status after having used it for so long 😉 The issue with using the new API is that we can't deploy it on the current version, so as a team we decided against doing that until the production instance provides it.

--> used it for long , doesn't mean it cannot disappear --> co move to stable and preferred API isn't bad idea

>> curl -s -H 'Bugzilla_login: osukup@suse.com' -H 'Bugzilla_api_key: TOKEN' 'https://bugzilla-next.suse.de/jsonrpc.cgi?method=Bug.get&params=%5B%7B%22ids%22%3A+%5B1204372%5D%7D%5D'
{"result":null,"error":{"code":101,"message":"Bug #1204372 does not exist."},"id":"https://bugzilla-next.suse.de/"}

which looks like api works but returns invalid data ? after looking to instance it seems empty ...

• there is interesting part ... api examples in confluence have login and api key in params, not header ...?

hmm, funny thing -> example in confluence isn't valid and returns:

{'error': {'code': 32000, 'message': "When using JSON-RPC over GET, you must specify a 'method' parameter. See the documentation at https://bugzilla.readthedocs.org/en/5.0/api/Bugzilla/WebService/Server/JSONRPC.html"}, 'result': None, 'id': 'https://bugzilla-next.suse.de/'}

which is even more funny because mentioned documentation returns non-existing page .. in related bugzilla docu is mentioned XMLRPC and JSONRPC exists but links to pages with docu are invalid...

cdywan wrote:

For me it's simply not responding again. Mentioned this on ENGINFRA-1457.

Still waiting on this.

osukup wrote:

I'm working on change of openQA_review to be able use both apis ( if is api_key in config present use rest else json-rpc )

How was this unblocked now? And why does it sound like you're pursuing a very different plan now than we discussed within the team? Some reasoning would be appreciated.