feat: [#546] artisan command up and down to set website Maintenance mode by praem90 · Pull Request #1198 · goravel/framework

praem90 · 2025-09-14T15:52:05Z

📑 Description

This PR adds two Artisan commands

Up
Down

go run . artisan down
go run . artisan up

The down commands creates a temporary file in the framework storage folder
The up commands removes that file if exists

There is an another middleware CheckForMaintenance, that checks for the file.
It returns the request with 503 status code if the file exists else allow the request to passthrough.

Closes goravel/goravel#546

✅ Checks

[ x ] Added test cases for my code

codecov · 2025-09-14T15:53:56Z

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 68.00000% with 40 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 70.62%. Comparing base (a68fb3f) to head (c9ed779).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
http/middleware/check_for_maintenance.go	35.29%	21 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
foundation/console/down_command.go	80.55%	7 Missing and 7 partials ⚠️
foundation/application.go	0.00%	2 Missing ⚠️
foundation/console/up_command.go	88.23%	1 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1198      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   70.64%   70.62%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         286      289       +3     
  Lines       17664    17789     +125     
==========================================
+ Hits        12479    12564      +85     
- Misses       4657     4688      +31     
- Partials      528      537       +9

☔ 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.

almas-x · 2025-09-14T22:29:39Z

This is a fantastic PR with a very useful addition to the framework! 🎉

I have a suggestion: how about allowing an optional reason flag for the down command? This could record the reason or announcement for the maintenance, and store it in the framework/down file. The middleware could then read this reason and return it, making it available for APIsor views to display. This would enhance the user experience by providing more context during maintenance mode.

almas-x · 2025-09-15T01:42:16Z

foundation/console/down_command_test.go

+
+func (s *DownCommandTestSuite) TestHandle() {
+	app := mocksfoundation.NewApplication(s.T())
+	tmpfile := filepath.Join(os.TempDir(), "/down")


In unit tests, use t.TempDir() instead of os.TempDir().

t.TempDir() is preferred in unit tests because it creates a unique temporary directory for each test and automatically cleans it up after the test finishes. This helps prevent conflicts and side effects between tests, making your tests safer and more reliable.

hwbrzzl · 2025-09-15T01:51:56Z

Please fix the windows CI.

hwbrzzl · 2025-09-15T01:58:13Z

Thanks, great job 👍 Could add some related screenshots in the PR description?

hwbrzzl · 2025-09-15T01:40:50Z

http/middleware/check_for_maintenance.go

+func CheckForMaintenance() http.Middleware {
+	return func(ctx http.Context) {
+		if file.Exists(path.Storage("framework/down")) {
+			ctx.Request().AbortWithStatus(http.StatusServiceUnavailable)


Suggested change

ctx.Request().AbortWithStatus(http.StatusServiceUnavailable)

ctx.Request().Abort(http.StatusServiceUnavailable)

hwbrzzl · 2025-09-15T01:46:25Z

foundation/console/down_command.go

+
+// Handle Execute the console command.
+func (r *DownCommand) Handle(ctx console.Context) error {
+	path := r.app.StoragePath("framework/down")


Suggested change

path := r.app.StoragePath("framework/down")

path := r.app.StoragePath("framework/maintenance")

hwbrzzl · 2025-09-15T01:46:58Z

foundation/console/down_command.go

+
+// Extend The console command extend.
+func (r *DownCommand) Extend() command.Extend {
+	return command.Extend{}


Could you implement these options as well?

Is reason still required in this case? @almas-x

I think I can implement those options @hwbrzzl

Compared to Laravel, the current implementation of reason is indeed a bit limited. I think we can refer to Laravel's implementation and support all the options in your screenshot except for the two that are crossed out.

Cool. What should be the response would be when no --render option is provided?

Returning the current logic should be fine.

hwbrzzl · 2026-01-13T03:15:29Z

/gemini review

gemini-code-assist

Code Review

This pull request introduces up and down artisan commands to manage maintenance mode, along with a middleware to enforce it. The implementation is a good start, but there are several areas for improvement. My review focuses on enhancing error handling within the new commands to provide clearer feedback for scripting and automation, and on improving the test coverage for the new maintenance middleware to ensure all its features are working as expected. I've also identified a few issues in a test helper function that could lead to flaky tests.

gemini-code-assist · 2026-01-13T03:17:55Z

foundation/console/down_command.go

+		hash, err := r.app.MakeHash().Make(secret)
+		if err != nil {
+			ctx.Error("Unable to generate and hash the secret")
+		} else {
+			options.Secret = hash
+		}


When hashing the provided secret fails, an error is printed, but the command continues its execution. This can lead to the application entering maintenance mode without the intended secret protection, which could be a security risk if the secret is expected for bypass. The function should return the error to halt execution.

Suggested change

hash, err := r.app.MakeHash().Make(secret)

if err != nil {

ctx.Error("Unable to generate and hash the secret")

} else {

options.Secret = hash

}

hash, err := r.app.MakeHash().Make(secret)

if err != nil {

ctx.Error("Unable to generate and hash the secret")

return err

}

options.Secret = hash

gemini-code-assist · 2026-01-13T03:17:55Z

http/middleware/check_for_maintenance_mode_test.go

+func TestMaintenanceMode(t *testing.T) {
+	server := httptest.NewServer(testHttpCheckForMaintenanceMiddleware(nethttp.HandlerFunc(func(w nethttp.ResponseWriter, r *nethttp.Request) {
+	})))
+	defer server.Close()
+
+	client := &nethttp.Client{}
+
+	err := file.Create(path.Storage("framework/maintenance"), "")
+	require.NoError(t, err)
+
+	resp, err := client.Get(server.URL)
+	require.NoError(t, err)
+	assert.Equal(t, http.StatusServiceUnavailable, resp.StatusCode)
+
+	err = file.Remove(path.Storage("framework/maintenance"))
+	require.NoError(t, err)
+
+	resp, err = client.Get(server.URL)
+	require.NoError(t, err)
+	assert.Equal(t, http.StatusOK, resp.StatusCode)
+}


The test for CheckForMaintenance middleware is incomplete. It only covers the case where an empty maintenance file exists, which causes a JSON unmarshalling error and results in a 503 status. The test suite should be expanded to cover all the features of the maintenance mode:

A valid maintenance file with a reason and custom status.

The redirect option.

The render option.

The secret bypass mechanism.

Without these tests, the middleware's core logic is not verified.

gemini-code-assist · 2026-01-13T03:17:55Z

http/middleware/verify_csrf_token_test.go

+func (r *TestRequest) Input(key string, defualtVaue ...string) string {
+	if body, err := io.ReadAll(r.ctx.request.Body); err != nil {
+		if len(defualtVaue) > 0 {
+			return defualtVaue[0]
+		}
+		return ""
+	} else {
+		data := map[string]any{}
+		if err := json.Unmarshal(body, &data); err != nil {
+			return ""
+		}
+		if data[key] == nil {
+			return ""
+		}
+		return data[key].(string)
+	}
+
+}


This implementation of Input has several issues:

Request body consumption: io.ReadAll(r.ctx.request.Body) consumes the request body. Subsequent calls to Input (or any other method that reads the body) within the same request lifecycle will find an empty body, leading to unpredictable test failures. The body should be read once and cached.

Unsafe type assertion: data[key].(string) is an unsafe type assertion that will panic if the value is not a string (e.g., a number). You should use the two-variable form: val, ok := data[key].(string).

Error handling: If json.Unmarshal fails, it returns an empty string, silently swallowing the error. This can make debugging tests difficult.

Content-Type assumption: The method assumes the request body is JSON. It doesn't handle other common content types like application/x-www-form-urlencoded.

A more robust implementation should be considered to avoid these problems.

foundation/console/down_command.go

gemini-code-assist · 2026-01-13T03:17:55Z

foundation/console/down_command.go

+			ctx.Error("Unable to generate and hash the secret")
+			return nil


When hashing the auto-generated secret fails, an error is printed, but the function returns nil, indicating success. This is misleading and prevents proper error handling by the caller. The function should propagate the underlying error.

Suggested change

ctx.Error("Unable to generate and hash the secret")

return nil

ctx.Error("Unable to generate and hash the secret")

return err

gemini-code-assist · 2026-01-13T03:17:55Z

foundation/console/down_command_test.go

+	content, err := file.GetContent(tmpfile)
+
+	assert.Nil(s.T(), err)
+
+	var maintenanceOptions *MaintenanceOptions
+	err = json.Unmarshal([]byte(content), &maintenanceOptions)
+	assert.Nil(s.T(), err)


In this test and others (TestHandleWithReason, TestHandleWithRedirect, TestHandleWithRender, TestHandleSecret), file.GetContent is used to read the file, which returns a string. This string is then converted back to a byte slice for json.Unmarshal. It would be more efficient and consistent with TestHandleWithSecret to use os.ReadFile directly, which returns a byte slice.

Suggested change

content, err := file.GetContent(tmpfile)

assert.Nil(s.T(), err)

var maintenanceOptions *MaintenanceOptions

err = json.Unmarshal([]byte(content), &maintenanceOptions)

assert.Nil(s.T(), err)

content, err := os.ReadFile(tmpfile)

assert.Nil(s.T(), err)

var maintenanceOptions *MaintenanceOptions

err = json.Unmarshal(content, &maintenanceOptions)

assert.Nil(s.T(), err)

gemini-code-assist · 2026-01-13T03:17:55Z

foundation/console/up_command.go

+
+	ctx.Error("The application is not in maintenance mode")
+
+	return nil


When the application is not in maintenance mode, the command prints an error but returns nil, indicating success. This can be misleading for scripts that rely on exit codes. It would be better to return an error to signal that the command's intended action was not performed. You will also need to import the fmt package.

Suggested change

return nil

return fmt.Errorf("the application is not in maintenance mode")

gemini-code-assist · 2026-01-13T03:17:55Z

http/middleware/check_for_maintenance.go

+			return
+		}
+
+		// Checking err to suppress the linter


This comment is a code smell. It implies that the error check is only present to satisfy the linter, not for actual error handling. If the error is not important, it should be explicitly ignored with _ = .... If it is important, it should be handled properly (e.g., logged), and this comment should be removed.

hwbrzzl

Thanks, great PR! Just left a few questions.

hwbrzzl · 2026-01-13T03:24:08Z

foundation/console/down_command.go

+
+// Handle Execute the console command.
+func (r *DownCommand) Handle(ctx console.Context) error {
+	path := r.app.StoragePath("framework/maintenance")


Use path.Storage() instead.

hwbrzzl · 2026-01-13T03:25:15Z

foundation/console/down_command.go

+	}
+
+	if render := ctx.Option("render"); render != "" {
+		if r.app.MakeView().Exists(render) {


Please inject View to the command directly instead of App, the same Hash.

hwbrzzl · 2026-01-13T03:26:43Z

foundation/console/down_command.go

+		if r.app.MakeView().Exists(render) {
+			options.Render = render
+		} else {
+			ctx.Error("Unable to find the view template")


Add the error to errors/list.go, the same other errors.

hwbrzzl · 2026-01-13T03:27:49Z

foundation/console/down_command.go

+	if redirect := ctx.Option("redirect"); redirect != "" {
+		options.Redirect = redirect
+	}
+


Suggested change

if redirect := ctx.Option("redirect"); redirect != "" {

options.Redirect = redirect

}

options.Redirect = ctx.Option("redirect")

hwbrzzl · 2026-01-13T03:29:32Z

foundation/console/down_command.go

+	if secret := ctx.Option("secret"); secret != "" {
+		hash, err := r.app.MakeHash().Make(secret)
+		if err != nil {
+			ctx.Error("Unable to generate and hash the secret")


return nil here.

hwbrzzl · 2026-01-13T03:33:21Z

http/middleware/check_for_maintenance.go

+	"github.com/goravel/framework/support/path"
+)
+
+func CheckForMaintenance() http.Middleware {


Suggested change

func CheckForMaintenance() http.Middleware {

func CheckForMaintenanceMode() http.Middleware {

hwbrzzl · 2026-01-13T03:35:33Z

http/middleware/check_for_maintenance.go

+		content, err := os.ReadFile(filepath)
+
+		if err != nil {
+			ctx.Request().Abort(http.StatusServiceUnavailable)


Suggested change

ctx.Request().Abort(http.StatusServiceUnavailable)

ctx.Response().String(http.StatusServiceUnavailable, err.Error()).Abort()

hwbrzzl · 2026-01-13T03:50:29Z

http/middleware/check_for_maintenance_mode.go

+			}
+
+			if err = ctx.Response().Redirect(http.StatusTemporaryRedirect, maintenanceOptions.Redirect).Abort(); err != nil {
+				return


How about panic in such cases? The panic will be caught and logged.

hwbrzzl · 2026-01-13T03:51:19Z

http/middleware/check_for_maintenance_mode_test.go

+	})
+}
+
+func TestMaintenanceMode(t *testing.T) {


Please cover more cases.

hwbrzzl · 2026-01-13T03:53:55Z

http/middleware/check_for_maintenance_test.go

+
+func testHttpCheckForMaintenanceMiddleware(next nethttp.Handler) nethttp.Handler {
+	return nethttp.HandlerFunc(func(w nethttp.ResponseWriter, r *nethttp.Request) {
+		CheckForMaintenance()(NewTestContext(r.Context(), next, w, r))


It's better to use a mock context instead of creating a test one.

praem90 requested a review from a team as a code owner September 14, 2025 15:52

almas-x reviewed Sep 15, 2025

View reviewed changes

hwbrzzl added the 🚀 Review Ready label Sep 15, 2025

hwbrzzl reviewed Sep 15, 2025

View reviewed changes

praem90 force-pushed the feat-546-artisan-command-up-and-down branch from 3479a4b to b70c346 Compare September 18, 2025 08:16

praem90 force-pushed the feat-546-artisan-command-up-and-down branch from e635bf5 to 07bc616 Compare January 4, 2026 15:58

praem90 added 20 commits January 11, 2026 21:38

Add up and down command

6189117

Use file helper to create files and add unit tests

0322b70

Fix the foundation.App dependency

1bba742

Use support/path instead of foundation.App

6b4b5f3

Add unit test case

ca71389

Add some missing checks

7a4b575

Add more missing checks

1be06c2

One more

04040a9

Fix tmpfile path

b1c522b

Use T.TempDir instead of os.TempDir in tests

b9af633

Add reason to the down command

8f3cb8a

Add option to the tests

4e49d50

Change the maintenance file name

f9002ab

close created file handles

e3ff849

Defer abort

e6ef8f2

Fix the linter issue

ad5dd35

Add more options to the down command

83df880

Use options

091eaaa

Check for maintenance mode respond

d16a3f0

Fix down_command_test

aab13eb

praem90 and others added 5 commits January 11, 2026 21:38

Add more unit test cases

7d5341b

Fix more lint issues

ab91f52

Fix lint issue

a6295e1

fix tests

c650511

fix tests

63f223a

hwbrzzl force-pushed the feat-546-artisan-command-up-and-down branch from a224b58 to 63f223a Compare January 11, 2026 13:42

hwbrzzl added 2 commits January 11, 2026 21:46

fix tests

4af9c68

fix tests

65fd56a

gemini-code-assist bot reviewed Jan 13, 2026

View reviewed changes

hwbrzzl reviewed Jan 13, 2026

View reviewed changes

praem90 added 6 commits January 26, 2026 13:52

Merge branch 'goravel:master' into feat-546-artisan-command-up-and-down

c9ed779

Address PR comments

08a8e6a

Fix check_for_maintenance_test

f79be00

Check Aborts in check_for_maintenance

6917e6a

Rename check_for_maintenance_mode

8438cfd

Fix and Write more unit tests for check_for_maintenance_mode middleware

59a1ca8

	ctx.Request().AbortWithStatus(http.StatusServiceUnavailable)
	ctx.Request().Abort(http.StatusServiceUnavailable)

	path := r.app.StoragePath("framework/down")
	path := r.app.StoragePath("framework/maintenance")

		ctx.Error("Unable to generate and hash the secret")
		return nil


		ctx.Error("The application is not in maintenance mode")

		return nil

	return nil
	return fmt.Errorf("the application is not in maintenance mode")

	func CheckForMaintenance() http.Middleware {
	func CheckForMaintenanceMode() http.Middleware {

	ctx.Request().Abort(http.StatusServiceUnavailable)
	ctx.Response().String(http.StatusServiceUnavailable, err.Error()).Abort()

Comments

Conversation

praem90 commented Sep 14, 2025

📑 Description

✅ Checks

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Sep 14, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

almas-x commented Sep 14, 2025

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

hwbrzzl commented Sep 15, 2025

Uh oh!

hwbrzzl commented Sep 15, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

praem90 Sep 15, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

hwbrzzl commented Jan 13, 2026

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Code Review

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist bot Jan 13, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist bot Jan 13, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist bot Jan 13, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist bot Jan 13, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist bot Jan 13, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist bot Jan 13, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist bot Jan 13, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

hwbrzzl left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Sep 14, 2025 •

edited

Loading

hwbrzzl commented Sep 15, 2025 •

edited

Loading

praem90 Sep 15, 2025 •

edited

Loading