feat(LAB-4291): add copy_workflow_from_project SDK method by RuellePaul · Pull Request #2033 · kili-technology/kili-python-sdk

RuellePaul · 2026-03-19T17:03:34Z

Add a high-level method to copy a workflow from one project to another, including step configurations (consensus, coverage, sendBackStepId).

Add copy_workflow_from_project to presentation client and use cases
Add send_back_step_id field to WorkflowStepCreate and WorkflowStepUpdate
Add sendBackStepId mapping in the GraphQL step mapper
Validate destination project has no labels before copying
Remap sendBackStepId references to new step IDs after creation
Don't copy assignees per specification
Add unit tests for all scenarios

Add a high-level method to copy a workflow from one project to another, including step configurations (consensus, coverage, sendBackStepId). - Add `copy_workflow_from_project` to presentation client and use cases - Add `send_back_step_id` field to WorkflowStepCreate and WorkflowStepUpdate - Add `sendBackStepId` mapping in the GraphQL step mapper - Validate destination project has no labels before copying - Remap sendBackStepId references to new step IDs after creation - Don't copy assignees per specification - Add unit tests for all scenarios Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

- Guard against self-copy (source == destination project ID) - Validate source step names are unique before name-based remapping - Log warning when fetching destination steps fails instead of silent swallow - Preserve original result when sendBackStepId remap produces no updates - Add tests for self-copy and duplicate step name edge cases Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

… project is not wv2

baptiste-olivier

Can you add a notebook, and add it to our e2e stack ? 🙏

review-notebook-app · 2026-03-27T15:09:21Z

Check out this pull request on

See visual diffs & provide feedback on Jupyter Notebooks.

Powered by ReviewNB

Added notebook

baptiste-olivier

Auto Review Summary

Verdict: Needs discussion (already merged)

Severity	Count
Blocker	0
Required	1
Suggestion	3
Question	2
Praise	2

Well-structured feature with good validations and test coverage, but one potential bug in the first-step update and some architectural concerns.

[PRAISE] Comprehensive validations

Good defensive checks: same project ID guard, destination has no labels, duplicate step names detection, and labeler count for consensus. These prevent confusing runtime errors.

[PRAISE] Thorough test coverage

11 test cases covering happy path, error conditions, sendBackStepId remapping, assignee routing, and edge cases (no existing workflow, extra dest steps). Well-structured test helpers (_make_source_steps, _setup_happy_path).

baptiste-olivier · 2026-03-30T14:18:53Z

src/kili/use_cases/project_workflow/__init__.py

+                    )
+
+        delete_steps = [str(step["id"]) for step in dest_steps[1:]] or None
+


[REQUIRED] _build_step_update doesn't copy stepCoverage or type for the first step

When updating the first destination step to match the first source step, only name, consensusCoverage, and numberOfExpectedLabelsForConsensus are set. The stepCoverage and type fields from the source step are not copied. If the first source step has a stepCoverage value, or a different type than the existing destination step, those properties will be silently lost.

# Current - missing stepCoverage and type def _build_step_update(dest_step_id, source_step): update = {"id": dest_step_id, "name": ...} # only sets consensusCoverage, numberOfExpectedLabelsForConsensus # Missing: stepCoverage, type return update

baptiste-olivier · 2026-03-30T14:18:53Z

src/kili/adapters/kili_api_gateway/project_workflow/types.py

    create_steps: Optional[list[WorkflowStepCreate]]
    update_steps: Optional[list[WorkflowStepUpdate]]
    delete_steps: Optional[list[str]]
+    for_copy: bool = False


[SUGGESTION] for_copy flag leaks through the architecture

This flag is threaded from the use case through ProjectWorkflowDataKiliAPIGatewayInput into the mapper, just to change serialization behavior (keeping None for consensus fields). The adapter layer shouldn't know about "copy" semantics. A cleaner approach would be to explicitly set consensusCoverage=0 or have the use case pass a sentinel to signal "include this field even if None", keeping the mapper stateless.

baptiste-olivier · 2026-03-30T14:18:53Z

src/kili/adapters/kili_api_gateway/project_workflow/mappers.py



-def update_step_mapper(data: Union[WorkflowStepCreate, WorkflowStepUpdate]) -> dict:
+def update_step_mapper(


[SUGGESTION] Typo: "worklow" → "workflow". Also ## is unusual for a Python comment — typically single #.

baptiste-olivier · 2026-03-30T14:18:53Z

recipes/copy_workflow_between_projects.ipynb

+     ]
+    }
+   ],
+   "source": [


[SUGGESTION] Notebook outputs contain real-looking test environment emails (test+edouard@kili-technology.com, test+max@kili-technology.com) and internal IDs. Consider clearing outputs or using placeholder data to avoid leaking internal information.

baptiste-olivier · 2026-03-30T14:18:53Z

src/kili/use_cases/project_workflow/__init__.py

+        # 1. Fetch source workflow steps and settings
+        logger.info("Fetching workflow steps from source project %s", source_project_id)
+        source_steps = self._kili_api_gateway.get_steps(source_project_id, _SOURCE_STEP_FIELDS)
+


[QUESTION] Consensus validation only checks the first step

_validate_consensus_labelers is only called for source_steps[0]. Is it guaranteed that only the first step can have consensus settings? If a later step could also have numberOfExpectedLabelsForConsensus, the copy would succeed but the destination workflow might be misconfigured.

baptiste-olivier · 2026-03-30T14:18:53Z

src/kili/use_cases/project_workflow/__init__.py

+        """
+        if source_project_id == destination_project_id:
+            raise ValueError(
+                "Source and destination project IDs must be different."


[QUESTION] No source project workflow V2 validation

The code validates the destination project is V2 but does not check the source project. If the source uses V1, get_steps might return unexpected data. Is this intentional because V1 projects can't have multi-step workflows anyway?

paulruelle and others added 4 commits March 19, 2026 17:58

feat(lab-4291): update first step instead of deleting, handle if dest…

b638d78

… project is not wv2

feat(lab-4291): handle consensus rules

acb2381

florianlega self-assigned this Mar 26, 2026

feat(lab-4291): handle consensus reset

f83a12a

florianlega force-pushed the feature/lab-4291-aau-from-the-sdk-i-copy-the-workflow-from-one-project-to branch from 86b8e63 to f83a12a Compare March 26, 2026 14:20

feat(lab-4291): update typing

aa070c6

florianlega requested review from BlueGrizzliBear, aurelienlombard and baptiste-olivier March 26, 2026 16:06

baptiste-olivier previously requested changes Mar 27, 2026

View reviewed changes

feat(lab-4291): add recipe for copy workflow

2e62b1f

florianlega force-pushed the feature/lab-4291-aau-from-the-sdk-i-copy-the-workflow-from-one-project-to branch from 0ab4fce to 2e62b1f Compare March 27, 2026 15:19

florianlega requested a review from FannyGaudin March 30, 2026 12:13

FannyGaudin approved these changes Mar 30, 2026

View reviewed changes

aurelienlombard approved these changes Mar 30, 2026

View reviewed changes

florianlega merged commit cb2d249 into main Mar 30, 2026
15 checks passed

florianlega deleted the feature/lab-4291-aau-from-the-sdk-i-copy-the-workflow-from-one-project-to branch March 30, 2026 13:52

baptiste-olivier reviewed Mar 30, 2026

View reviewed changes

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

feat(LAB-4291): add copy_workflow_from_project SDK method#2033

feat(LAB-4291): add copy_workflow_from_project SDK method#2033
florianlega merged 7 commits intomainfrom
feature/lab-4291-aau-from-the-sdk-i-copy-the-workflow-from-one-project-to

RuellePaul commented Mar 19, 2026

Uh oh!

baptiste-olivier left a comment

Uh oh!

review-notebook-app bot commented Mar 27, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

baptiste-olivier left a comment

Uh oh!

baptiste-olivier Mar 30, 2026

Uh oh!

baptiste-olivier Mar 30, 2026

Uh oh!

baptiste-olivier Mar 30, 2026

Uh oh!

baptiste-olivier Mar 30, 2026

Uh oh!

baptiste-olivier Mar 30, 2026

Uh oh!

baptiste-olivier Mar 30, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

6 participants

		)

		delete_steps = [str(step["id"]) for step in dest_steps[1:]] or None



		def update_step_mapper(data: Union[WorkflowStepCreate, WorkflowStepUpdate]) -> dict:
		def update_step_mapper(

Conversation

RuellePaul commented Mar 19, 2026

Uh oh!

baptiste-olivier left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

review-notebook-app bot commented Mar 27, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

baptiste-olivier left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Auto Review Summary

[PRAISE] Comprehensive validations

[PRAISE] Thorough test coverage

Uh oh!

baptiste-olivier Mar 30, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

baptiste-olivier Mar 30, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

baptiste-olivier Mar 30, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

baptiste-olivier Mar 30, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

baptiste-olivier Mar 30, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

baptiste-olivier Mar 30, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

6 participants