Skip to content
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

fix: use testify instead of t.Fatal or t.Error in client package (part 1) #18967

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 21, 2024

Conversation

mmorel-35
Copy link
Contributor

@mmorel-35 mmorel-35 commented Nov 30, 2024

Description

This uses testify instead of testing for t.Fatal or t.Error calls in client package

Related to #18972

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link

Hi @mmorel-35. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a etcd-io member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 30, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 68.74%. Comparing base (39d9cd7) to head (99f99cb).
Report is 59 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

see 24 files with indirect coverage changes

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #18967      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   68.77%   68.74%   -0.04%     
==========================================
  Files         420      420              
  Lines       35623    35623              
==========================================
- Hits        24500    24489      -11     
- Misses       9699     9708       +9     
- Partials     1424     1426       +2     

Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 39d9cd7...99f99cb. Read the comment docs.

@ahrtr
Copy link
Member

ahrtr commented Dec 4, 2024

/ok-to-test

@mmorel-35 mmorel-35 force-pushed the testifier/client branch 3 times, most recently from 287df21 to 1d5a9bd Compare December 4, 2024 18:08
@ivanvc
Copy link
Member

ivanvc commented Dec 4, 2024

/retest

@ivanvc
Copy link
Member

ivanvc commented Dec 4, 2024

Question, @mmorel-35. How are you planning on splitting these pull requests? I want to understand it so that I can deliver a proper review :)

@mmorel-35
Copy link
Contributor Author

I'm grouping PR per package/subpackage and priorizing t.Fatal replacement.
I try to limit the number of modification to less than 100 or 200 lines so it stays reviewable

Copy link
Member

@ivanvc ivanvc left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for the work, @mmorel-35.
I did a grep in the client directory from this branch, and it looks like there are only 24 more instances of t.Fatal after your changes. If you add them, the PR will still be less than 200 changed lines.

@@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ import (

const (
// PrivateDirMode grants owner to make/remove files inside the directory.
PrivateDirMode = 0777
PrivateDirMode = 0o777
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This line seems to come from the gofumpt change, not directly to testify.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Indeed but as golangci-lint is not executed on windows platform it will never be detected in this file. Shall it be keot or reverted here ?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't mind this being included, could add it as a separate commit perhaps but not a big deal.

@mmorel-35
Copy link
Contributor Author

/retest

Copy link
Member

@jmhbnz jmhbnz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM - Thanks @mmorel-35

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: ahrtr, jmhbnz, mmorel-35

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 /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@ahrtr ahrtr merged commit 40b856e into etcd-io:main Dec 21, 2024
35 checks passed
@mmorel-35 mmorel-35 deleted the testifier/client branch December 21, 2024 14:29
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants