-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
tests: add coverage report and increase coverage #1089
Conversation
Useful for us to go chase where we can improve the unit test coverage. Note the default top-level targets do NOT call the cover-variants and, at this point in time, there's no reason why they ever should. Signed-off-by: Francesco Romani <[email protected]>
add basic unit test coverage which was missing from the introducing PR Signed-off-by: Francesco Romani <[email protected]>
add basic unit test coverage which was missing from the introducing PR Signed-off-by: Francesco Romani <[email protected]>
add basic unit test coverage which was missing from the introducing PR Signed-off-by: Francesco Romani <[email protected]>
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: ffromani The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
/hold more tests coming |
5f80768
to
f798d8f
Compare
/hold cancel |
infra issue (?!) |
Thanks for the valuable tests |
/hold |
add basic unit test coverage which was missing from the introducing PR Signed-off-by: Francesco Romani <[email protected]>
add missing (basic) test Signed-off-by: Francesco Romani <[email protected]>
this code is obsolete since a good while. Signed-off-by: Francesco Romani <[email protected]>
add explicit and basic test coverage for FindConditions Signed-off-by: Francesco Romani <[email protected]>
f798d8f
to
fa65142
Compare
New changes are detected. LGTM label has been removed. |
/hold cancel |
more precise coverage run: let's focus on packages we control, ignoring autogenerated functions (e.g. deepcopy) Signed-off-by: Francesco Romani <[email protected]>
add initial base coverage for the only function in the pkg which didn't had test coverage Signed-off-by: Francesco Romani <[email protected]>
we have a dependency (govalidator) which we import for exactly one function which is pretty simple to replace. We do it in this patch. Signed-off-by: Francesco Romani <[email protected]>
I think the problem is we lose events. This would explain the flakiness
|
/retest-required |
|
/retest-required |
add developer (not yet CI, if ever) facilities to see the test coverage, and improve unit test coverage for recently added packages