fix: patch checksum validation logic

[anuragxxd]

Description

Please include a summary of the change and which issue is fixed. Please also include relevant motivation and context. List any dependencies that are required for this change.

Fixes # (issue)

Type of change

Please delete options that are not relevant.

• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
• Documentation update

Checklist:

• My code follows the style guidelines of this project
• I have performed a self-review of my own code
• I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
• My changes generate no new warnings
• I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
• New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
• I have not reduced the existing code coverage
• I have added docstrings following the Python style guidelines of this project to all new modules, classes, methods and functions are documented with docstrings following; I have updated any previously existing docstrings, if applicable
• I have updated any sections of the app's documentation that are affected by the proposed changes, if applicable

Summary by Sourcery

Bug Fixes:

• Fix checksum validation logic for production tools by properly grouping checks for missing or empty checksum values.

[sourcery-ai]

Reviewer's Guide

This PR fixes the checksum validation logic for production tools by adding proper parentheses around the missing/empty checksum checks in the process_files method to ensure the condition applies only when is_production is true.

Sequence Diagram: Corrected Checksum Validation in process_files

sequenceDiagram
    participant Caller
    participant RegisterObjectsEndpoint
    participant FileBeingProcessed

    Caller->>RegisterObjectsEndpoint: process_files()
    loop For each file (_file)
        RegisterObjectsEndpoint->>RegisterObjectsEndpoint: Check self.data['is_production']
        alt self.data['is_production'] is true
            RegisterObjectsEndpoint->>FileBeingProcessed: Access _file['file_wrapper'] to check checksum
            alt 'checksum' is missing or empty in _file['file_wrapper']
                RegisterObjectsEndpoint->>RegisterObjectsEndpoint: Log error: "Production tools must contain checksum..."
                RegisterObjectsEndpoint->>Caller: Raise BadRequest (due to checksum issue)
            else Checksum is valid for production tool's file
                RegisterObjectsEndpoint->>RegisterObjectsEndpoint: Continue processing _file
            end
        else is_production is false (checksum validation skipped)
            RegisterObjectsEndpoint->>RegisterObjectsEndpoint: Continue processing _file
        end
    end

Loading

Class Diagram: Update to RegisterObjectsEndpoint Class

classDiagram
  class RegisterObjectsEndpoint {
    +process_files(): void
  }

Loading

File-Level Changes

Change	Details	Files
Correct logical grouping in checksum validation condition	Wrapped the missing/empty checksum checks in parentheses Adjusted line breaks for the condition to enhance readability	trs_filer/ga4gh/trs/endpoints/register_objects.py

---

Tips and commands

Interacting with Sourcery

• Trigger a new review: Comment @sourcery-ai review on the pull request.
• Continue discussions: Reply directly to Sourcery's review comments.
• Generate a GitHub issue from a review comment: Ask Sourcery to create an
  issue from a review comment by replying to it. You can also reply to a
  review comment with @sourcery-ai issue to create an issue from it.
• Generate a pull request title: Write @sourcery-ai anywhere in the pull
  request title to generate a title at any time. You can also comment
  @sourcery-ai title on the pull request to (re-)generate the title at any time.
• Generate a pull request summary: Write @sourcery-ai summary anywhere in
  the pull request body to generate a PR summary at any time exactly where you
  want it. You can also comment @sourcery-ai summary on the pull request to
  (re-)generate the summary at any time.
• Generate reviewer's guide: Comment @sourcery-ai guide on the pull
  request to (re-)generate the reviewer's guide at any time.
• Resolve all Sourcery comments: Comment @sourcery-ai resolve on the
  pull request to resolve all Sourcery comments. Useful if you've already
  addressed all the comments and don't want to see them anymore.
• Dismiss all Sourcery reviews: Comment @sourcery-ai dismiss on the pull
  request to dismiss all existing Sourcery reviews. Especially useful if you
  want to start fresh with a new review - don't forget to comment
  @sourcery-ai review to trigger a new review!

Customizing Your Experience

Access your dashboard to:

• Enable or disable review features such as the Sourcery-generated pull request
  summary, the reviewer's guide, and others.
• Change the review language.
• Add, remove or edit custom review instructions.
• Adjust other review settings.

Getting Help

• Contact our support team for questions or feedback.
• Visit our documentation for detailed guides and information.
• Keep in touch with the Sourcery team by following us on X/Twitter, LinkedIn or GitHub.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 94.88%. Comparing base (1c8572c) to head (64bd2f4).
Report is 1 commits behind head on dev.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##              dev     #118   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   94.88%   94.88%           
=======================================
  Files          12       12           
  Lines         586      586           
=======================================
  Hits          556      556           
  Misses         30       30           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[sourcery-ai]

Hey @anuragxxd - I've reviewed your changes and they look great!

Here's what I looked at during the review

• 🟡 General issues: 1 issue found
• 🟢 Security: all looks good
• 🟢 Testing: all looks good
• 🟢 Documentation: all looks good

---

Sourcery is free for open source - if you like our reviews please consider sharing them ✨

• X
• Mastodon
• LinkedIn
• Facebook

_{Help me be more useful! Please click 👍 or 👎 on each comment and I'll use the feedback to improve your reviews.}