added reasons why certain warnings were filtered in 'pytest.ini'

[rahulsindhu01]

Fixes

Fixes #1805 by @AetherUnbound

Description

Testing Instructions

Checklist

• My pull request has a descriptive title (not a vague title likeUpdate index.md).
• My pull request targets the default branch of the repository (main) or a parent feature branch.
• My commit messages follow best practices.
• My code follows the established code style of the repository.
• I added or updated tests for the changes I made (if applicable).
• I added or updated documentation (if applicable).
• I tried running the project locally and verified that there are no visible errors.
• I ran the DAG documentation generator (if applicable).

Developer Certificate of Origin

Developer Certificate of Origin

Developer Certificate of Origin
Version 1.1

Copyright (C) 2004, 2006 The Linux Foundation and its contributors.
1 Letterman Drive
Suite D4700
San Francisco, CA, 94129

Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies of this
license document, but changing it is not allowed.


Developer's Certificate of Origin 1.1

By making a contribution to this project, I certify that:

(a) The contribution was created in whole or in part by me and I
    have the right to submit it under the open source license
    indicated in the file; or

(b) The contribution is based upon previous work that, to the best
    of my knowledge, is covered under an appropriate open source
    license and I have the right under that license to submit that
    work with modifications, whether created in whole or in part
    by me, under the same open source license (unless I am
    permitted to submit under a different license), as indicated
    in the file; or

(c) The contribution was provided directly to me by some other
    person who certified (a), (b) or (c) and I have not modified
    it.

(d) I understand and agree that this project and the contribution
    are public and that a record of the contribution (including all
    personal information I submit with it, including my sign-off) is
    maintained indefinitely and may be redistributed consistent with
    this project or the open source license(s) involved.

[stacimc]

Thanks @rahulsindhu01!

I think the correct issue this PR is referencing is #1805 -- if that's correct, do you mind updating your PR description?

The filtered warnings in the catalog already had some brief comments explaining them here, above the ones you added -- although I appreciate your added detail. For #1805 we'll want to add these comments to the API and ingestion server pytest.ini files.

[rahulsindhu01]

@stacimc
my bad
will do those changes now

[rahulsindhu01]

@stacimc ive done the changes as you said me to do

[rahulsindhu01]

Nice

[stacimc]

Thanks for the updates @rahulsindhu01!

I left a few nitpicks about formatting/etc, but my blocking concern is that while these notes do a great job of explaining what each filtered warning is, I think they don't quite capture why they're considered safe to ignore (beyond wanting to declutter test logs).

I realize this is probably a difficult ask without having a lot of historical context on the project, so I took a look and left a few comments. @obulat may also have some good insight here!

[stacimc]

I'm not actually sure this suppressed warning is still needed, maybe @dhruvkb can comment since it looks like he added it initially? There's also this somewhat related issue.

[rahulsindhu01]

Ok @stacimc, what should i do now

[stacimc]

Hello @rahulsindhu01, I think these are the next steps needed for this PR:

1. Rebase on main, to get the changes from Add tzinfo in factory generated access tokens #2497
2. Remove the comment about the naive datetime warning, which is no longer suppressed
3. Remove the changes to catalog/pytest.ini
4. Update the comments for the remaining warnings to include the reasoning for why they have been suppressed, as described in my comments here and here

Let us know if you have any questions, or if you'd like a maintainer to take over.

[rahulsindhu01]

@stacimc ill do it

[rahulsindhu01]

@stacimc ive rebased the file and made other changes that you requested aswell

[stacimc]

@rahulsindhu01 Thank you! Your changes look great, but it looks like there's been an issue with the rebase resulting in all of the additional changes. Since you're on a forked repo, did you first rebase main with upstream/main before rebasing your branch?

Since the changeset is so small, if you have any more issues cleaning up the history it might even be easier to just open a new PR with just the final changes. Thanks so much for your patience on this one!

[openverse-bot]

Based on the low urgency of this PR, the following reviewers are being gently reminded to review this PR:

@obulat
@sarayourfriend
This reminder is being automatically generated due to the urgency configuration.

Excluding weekend¹ days, this PR was ready for review 15 day(s) ago. PRs labelled with low urgency are expected to be reviewed within 5 weekday(s)².

@rahulsindhu01, if this PR is not ready for a review, please draft it to prevent reviewers from getting further unnecessary pings.

Footnotes

1. Specifically, Saturday and Sunday. ↩

2. For the purpose of these reminders we treat Monday - Friday as weekdays. Please note that the operation that generates these reminders runs at midnight UTC on Monday - Friday. This means that depending on your timezone, you may be pinged outside of the expected range. ↩

[AetherUnbound]

@rahulsindhu01 I'm going to draft this PR for the time being so our bot is placated, but please let us know if you need any assistance with Staci's last request 🙂

[obulat]

I moved the comments in api/pytest.ini above the errors they refer to, as suggested by @stacimc .

In the future, do not open PRs from the main branch of your fork, @rahulsindhu01 : it would be impossible to create other PRs or update your main branch. Always create a new branch for a new PR.

Thank you for your contribution! 🌟

[obulat]

@dhruvkb , could you please take a look at this PR? Do we still need to suppress this warning?

[rahulsindhu01]

Ok got it

[sarayourfriend]

Thanks for the contribution @rahulsindhu01

Changes are sufficient for the time being and mostly address the feedback request. If additional changes are needed, we can open new issues to explore specific warnings with staff-only labels. It's clear this particular issue requires historical and domain knowledge beyond the scope of what we usually ask for from new contributors.