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
ReadError: file could not be opened successfully #65
Comments
In short, the user uploaded a zero byte tarball, which failed to open (as it should). Correctly an exception was raised, and this was propagated to the frontend as a 500 error (which is also fine), but in the backend this ticket was generated (which is not fine). Please check what the best way is to propagate exceptions from the tus-handler back to the frontend, where it is clear for the user what went wrong, and doesn't generate exceptions on invalid tars/zips/etc. |
There currently isn't really a way to talk back to the client that they uploaded an invalid tarball/zipfile. So far this only happened when someone uploaded a zero-byte tarball, which is pretty obvious. Hopefully that remains this way. The behaviour is now: if you upload an invalid tarball/zipfile, after pressing validate, the file is no longer in the filelist. Hopefully that gives enough clues to the user what is going on.
This is a bit of a hack in comparison with the normal validation method, but these errors happen on upload, where the other errors happen on validation. Sadly, the tusd implementation is a bit wonky, and we cannot really communicate back with the client when we found such error during upload (as strictly seen the upload succeeded fine; the content is broken). So we cannot report the error on upload, and as such are forced to do it after upload.
This is a bit of a hack in comparison with the normal validation method, but these errors happen on upload, where the other errors happen on validation. Sadly, the tusd implementation is a bit wonky, and we cannot really communicate back with the client when we found such error during upload (as strictly seen the upload succeeded fine; the content is broken). So we cannot report the error on upload, and as such are forced to do it after upload.
This is a bit of a hack in comparison with the normal validation method, but these errors happen on upload, where the other errors happen on validation. Sadly, the tusd implementation is a bit wonky, and we cannot really communicate back with the client when we found such error during upload (as strictly seen the upload succeeded fine; the content is broken). So we cannot report the error on upload, and as such are forced to do it after upload.
Sentry Issue: BANANAS-API-D
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: