Feat(SPV-1544): admin record transaction for user endpoint #949
Conversation
Manual TestsβΉοΈ Remember to ask team members to perform manual tests and to assign |
|
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #949 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 34.50% 34.15% -0.36%
==========================================
Files 437 440 +3
Lines 20826 21067 +241
==========================================
+ Hits 7186 7195 +9
- Misses 13041 13268 +227
- Partials 599 604 +5
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
... and 1 file with indirect coverage changes Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.
π New features to boost your workflow:
|
| }) | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| func TestDoubleSpending(t *testing.T) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would skip error cases for admin-endpoints because since it is handled by the same engine method it is already tested by other tests anyway.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I wouldn't, those are kind'a blackbox tests, to skip them, it would need to know that we're using the same service.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The general idea of these tests was to test the behaviour of admin delete user. They are the same now, but if something changes under the hood they might use different implementation so I think it would be better to have them here even if they are "the same". It doesn't affect any performance that much but keeps us ensured that everything works correctly
| }) | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| func TestTransactionWithChange(t *testing.T) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would skip this test since it is already covered by the one for "user"
| }) | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| func TestExternalOutgoingTransaction(t *testing.T) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would skip one of these: TestExternalOutgoingTransaction or TestInternalOutgoingTransaction.
Pull Request Checklist