修复QA-Engineer在RunCode(执行用例)结束后,要求Engineer WriteCode(修改代码), Engineer未修改,业务流直接结束的问题
User description
Features 修复QA-Engineer在RunCode(执行用例)结束后,要求Engineer WriteCode(修改代码), Engineer未修改,业务流直接结束的问题
Influence 导致过早结束业务流程,Engineer代码有问题而直接结束流程;修复后会增加代码修改流程,增加成功率,但同时会降低完成率。请慎重评估是否合入。
Result 修改后,在QA测试发现原码有问题时,Engineer继续修改代码,进行重试。
PR Type
Bug fix, Enhancement
Description
- Added and enhanced debug and warning logs across multiple roles to improve traceability and debugging.
- Increased the test rounds allowed for QA engineers to ensure thorough testing and bug fixing.
- Included
RunCodein the actions that can trigger code writing, enhancing the engineer's role responsiveness.
Changes walkthrough 📝
| Relevant files | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Enhancement |
|
💡 PR-Agent usage: Comment
/helpon the PR to get a list of all available PR-Agent tools and their descriptions
PR Description updated to latest commit (https://github.com/geekan/MetaGPT/commit/463d2a59368a58f9886bbcf8240087f590a47312)
- [ ] Copy walkthrough table to "Files Changed" Tab
PR Review 🔍
| ⏱️ Estimated effort to review [1-5] |
3, because the PR involves multiple files and changes in the logic of the application, particularly in handling actions and responses. The changes are moderate in complexity, involving updates to logging and action handling which requires a good understanding of the existing system architecture and flow. |
| 🧪 Relevant tests |
No |
| ⚡ Possible issues |
Possible Bug: The addition of |
|
Logging Overhead: The increased use of debug and warning logs could potentially lead to performance issues due to excessive logging, especially in production environments. | |
| 🔒 Security concerns |
No |
PR Code Suggestions ✨
| Category | Suggestion | Score |
| Best practice |
Use structured logging for better performance and flexibilityConsider using structured logging instead of formatting strings directly within the logger metagpt/provider/base_llm.py [151]
Suggestion importance[1-10]: 8Why: The suggestion to use structured logging is relevant and improves the logging mechanism by making it more flexible and performant, which is crucial in a logging-heavy module like this one. | 8 |
| Maintainability |
Handle unexpected
| 7 |
| Enhancement |
Validate test rounds to ensure they do not exceed the allowed limitConsider validating the metagpt/roles/qa_engineer.py [35-36]
Suggestion importance[1-10]: 7Why: Validating | 7 |
| Possible issue |
Add checks for unexpected actions count to improve error detectionInstead of logging a debug message for actions count, consider adding a condition to check
Suggestion importance[1-10]: 6Why: The suggestion to add a check for the actions count is valid and helps in error detection. However, it's a moderate improvement as it mainly adds to the robustness of the logging and error handling. | 6 |
Codecov Report
Attention: Patch coverage is 77.77778% with 2 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.
Project coverage is 70.20%. Comparing base (
f201b2f) to head (463d2a5).
| Files | Patch % | Lines |
|---|---|---|
| metagpt/roles/engineer.py | 50.00% | 2 Missing :warning: |
:exclamation: Your organization needs to install the Codecov GitHub app to enable full functionality.
Additional details and impacted files
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1267 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 70.22% 70.20% -0.03%
==========================================
Files 316 316
Lines 18860 18867 +7
==========================================
Hits 13245 13245
- Misses 5615 5622 +7
:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.
Engineer并未订阅RunCode消息,因此即使消息发给了Engineer,在_observe阶段也会被忽略掉。
建议参考Product Manager给Engineer转bug单的流程,将需要Engineer重写的代码作为bug单转给Engineer。参见metagpt/actions/write_prd.py的_handle_bugfix:
async def _handle_bugfix(self, req: Document) -> Message:
# ... bugfix logic ...
await self.repo.docs.save(filename=BUGFIX_FILENAME, content=req.content)
await self.repo.docs.save(filename=REQUIREMENT_FILENAME, content="")
return AIMessage(
content=f"A new issue is received: {BUGFIX_FILENAME}",
cause_by=FixBug,
send_to="Alex", # the name of Engineer
)
metagpt/roles/engineer.py中的_think:
if self.config.inc and msg.cause_by in write_plan_and_change_filters:
logger.debug(f"TODO WriteCodePlanAndChange:{msg.model_dump_json()}")
await self._new_code_plan_and_change_action(cause_by=msg.cause_by)
return self.rc.todo
Engineer并未订阅RunCode消息,因此即使消息发给了Engineer,在_observe阶段也会被忽略掉。 建议参考Product Manager给Engineer转bug单的流程,将需要Engineer重写的代码作为bug单转给Engineer。参见metagpt/actions/write_prd.py的_handle_bugfix:async def _handle_bugfix(self, req: Document) -> Message: # ... bugfix logic ... await self.repo.docs.save(filename=BUGFIX_FILENAME, content=req.content) await self.repo.docs.save(filename=REQUIREMENT_FILENAME, content="") return AIMessage( content=f"A new issue is received: {BUGFIX_FILENAME}", cause_by=FixBug, send_to="Alex", # the name of Engineer )
metagpt/roles/engineer.py中的_think:if self.config.inc and msg.cause_by in write_plan_and_change_filters: logger.debug(f"TODO WriteCodePlanAndChange:{msg.model_dump_json()}") await self._new_code_plan_and_change_action(cause_by=msg.cause_by) return self.rc.todo
好的,感谢!