Use exceptions instead of HTML responses with error statuses

[SpecLad]

Motivation and context

How has this been tested?

Checklist

• I submit my changes into the develop branch
• I have created a changelog fragment
• [ ] I have updated the documentation accordingly
• [ ] I have added tests to cover my changes
• [ ] I have linked related issues (see GitHub docs)
• [ ] I have increased versions of npm packages if it is necessary
  (cvat-canvas,
  cvat-core,
  cvat-data and
  cvat-ui)

License

• I submit my code changes under the same MIT License that covers the project.
  Feel free to contact the maintainers if that's a concern.

[coderabbitai]

Important

Review skipped

Draft detected.

Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository. To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.

---

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

• Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
  • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
  • Generate unit testing code for this file.
  • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
• Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
  • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
• PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
  • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
  • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
  • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

• @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
• @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
• @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
• @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
• @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
• @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
• @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
• @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

• Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
• Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
• Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

• You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
• Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
• If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

• Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
• Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
• Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

[sonarcloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
1 New issue
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarCloud

[SpecLad]

/check

[github-actions]

❌ Some checks failed
📄 See logs here

[zhiltsov-max]

@SpecLad, if you're working on this, please check if you can improve the situation with output data in the error, asked here: #8348 (comment)

Would it be hard to improve formatting for the validation error? Like return only the stuff thats insize string=?. I suppose we have lots of cases now when we can get it. On the second thought I belive its easier to UI to parse it for better UX, we already have some handling for such cases. Maybe not really relevant for now

[SpecLad]

@zhiltsov-max I don't understand what that comment is talking about. Is it some specific error? What's string=?

[klakhov]

@SpecLad
When I was testing the honeypots patch Ive seen different validation errors. For example this one, when Im trying to create honeypots task from video file:

The Idea was to improve the UX of the error. It seems we need to show only stuff that is written inside string= part of the error. As everything else seems as unnecessary information to the user

[SpecLad]

Ah, I see. I think that exception is coming from inside an RQ job. I do think we have some deficiencies in how those exceptions are presented to the user, but fixing that would be out of scope for this PR.

That said, I find it odd that that particular error would be thrown from an RQ job. It seems like it's just validating input parameters; it would be better to do that in the view before starting the RQ job. Not only is that more efficient, but it should also fix the presentation problem.

[zhiltsov-max]

It seems like it's just validating input parameters; it would be better to do that in the view before starting the RQ job.

Not everything can be validated before processing. For instance, in this case, you'd need to know that the input is video (it's possible to check, sure). It can only be checked after the Upload-Finished data request. There are other checks that depend on the actual data provided, like depending on frame count.

[SpecLad]

For instance, in this case, you'd need to know that the input is video (it's possible to check, sure). It can only be checked after the Upload-Finished data request.

Okay, that's a fair point.

[SpecLad]

I don't have time to finish this PR right now; I'll try to come back to it later.