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 
8 participants
Extracted fix from #2371. Fixes (and improves) #2446.