Added unit tests for custom resource interpreter's configuration manager #5864
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Anuj Agrawal <anujagrawal380@gmail.com>
karmada-bot
added
the
kind/feature
karmada-bot
added
the
size/XL
|
Hi @mohamedawnallah , found some flaky tests. |
|
Hi @anujagrawal699 can you help rebase the newest master branch? |
Hi @XiShanYongYe-Chang , my branch is already up to date with master. I think the test is still flaky after the fix. |
I see. Thanks~ I'm going to keep an eye on it, |
|
Ask @mohamedawnallah to help take a look again. |
|
/retest |
| func TestNewResourceCustomAccessor(t *testing.T) { | ||
| accessor := NewResourceCustomAccessor() | ||
| assert.NotNil(t, accessor, "Expected non-nil accessor") | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this test necessary? It seems like it just improves coverage
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This test is harmless and does not increase maintenance complexity. I think it can be kept.
|
/assign |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: XiShanYongYe-Chang 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 |
karmada-bot
added
the
approved
|
/lgtm |
Description:
This PR adds comprehensive unit tests for the custom resource interpreter's configuration manager. The tests verify the core functionality of configuration management operations including script handling, merging behaviors, and dependency management.
Additions:
Test Coverage:
What type of PR is this?
/kind feature
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes a part of #5470
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?: