Fix /api/repo/search integration tests #2550
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #2550 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 26.99% 26.99%
=======================================
Files 85 85
Lines 17097 17097
=======================================
Hits 4615 4615
Misses 11807 11807
Partials 675 675Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
tboerger
added
the
lgtm/need 2
Morlinest
force-pushed
the
fix/api-repo-integration-tests
branch
from
3ee61ec
to
5a3a6de
Compare
Morlinest
force-pushed
the
fix/api-repo-integration-tests
branch
from
ecce5cc
to
c3beba9
Compare
| DecodeJSON(t, resp, &body) | ||
| for _, repo := range body.data { | ||
| assert.True(t, strings.Contains(repo.Name, keyword)) | ||
| assert.NotEmpty(t, body.Data) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@bkcsoft I don't want to stop tests.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@Morlinest Why? One failing test is enough to let whole integration tests fail. It will speed up testing a lot.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@daviian If you are thinking about that like this, we should use require.* everywhere :). I want to see more than 1 step ahead. In my opinion, it's like parsing a form and showing just first error to user.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@Morlinest in this particular test every following assertion will evaluate to false so there is no reason to check them anyway
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@daviian Following assertions are inside range loop.
|
LGTM |
tboerger
added
lgtm/need 1
|
LGTM |
|
Make LG-TM work |
|
Make L-G-T-M work again |
|
Make L-GTM work :) |
tboerger
added
lgtm/done
Extracted fix from #2371. Fixes (and improves) #2446.