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

operator+pkg: depend on clientset.Interface instead of *clientset.Clientset #5616

Merged

Conversation

mohamedawnallah
Copy link
Contributor

@mohamedawnallah mohamedawnallah commented Sep 27, 2024

Description

In this commit, we apply the Dependency Inversion Principle by depending on an interface instead of a concrete type. This improves flexibility and testability.

Motivation and Context

While testing the Karmada Init and DeInit in the operator package (#5613), I found it difficult to mock *clientset.Clientset, complicating unit tests. By refactoring to depend on an interface, we improve flexibility and testability, allowing for the integration of a fake clientset since it implements that interface.

What type of PR is this?

/kind cleanup

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

NONE

Signed-off-by: Mohamed Awnallah <mohamedmohey2352@gmail.com>
@karmada-bot karmada-bot added the size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. label Sep 27, 2024
@codecov-commenter
Copy link

⚠️ Please install the 'codecov app svg image' to ensure uploads and comments are reliably processed by Codecov.

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 28.57143% with 5 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 35.19%. Comparing base (4c8bcd4) to head (a640f09).
Report is 62 commits behind head on master.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
operator/pkg/util/kubeconfig.go 0.00% 2 Missing ⚠️
pkg/karmadactl/cmdinit/karmada/deploy.go 0.00% 2 Missing ⚠️
pkg/karmadactl/util/apiclient/apiclient.go 0.00% 1 Missing ⚠️

❗ Your organization needs to install the Codecov GitHub app to enable full functionality.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #5616      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   34.14%   35.19%   +1.05%     
==========================================
  Files         643      645       +2     
  Lines       44524    44869     +345     
==========================================
+ Hits        15203    15792     +589     
+ Misses      28165    27846     -319     
- Partials     1156     1231      +75     
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 35.19% <28.57%> (+1.05%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Copy link
Member

@RainbowMango RainbowMango left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/lgtm
/approve

Thanks @mohamedawnallah!

@karmada-bot karmada-bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Sep 29, 2024
@karmada-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: RainbowMango

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

@karmada-bot karmada-bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Sep 29, 2024
@karmada-bot karmada-bot merged commit 59e3025 into karmada-io:master Sep 29, 2024
12 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants