test(i): Integrate explain tests into test action system

[shahzadlone]

Resolves #1243

Description:

• Integrates the new explain test setup with the new testing with action based setup.
• Converts all simple explain tests.
• Converts all default explain tests.
• Converts all execute explain tests.
• Removes the documents for default and simple tests as they aren't worth maintaining (it doesn't effect simple explain testing).
• Fixed a test that was being omitted due to it's file not having the extension "*_test.go".

For Reviewers:

• I believe commit by commit review should be fairly clean.
• Mostly concerned about the commit(s) with (CORE) commit label decorator.
• Commits with (RENAME) or (UNRELATED) label decorators can be ignored.
• Commits with(PREP) label decorators are preparations needed before cleanly doing the integrations/conversions.
• Is there any preference to moving the test cases to the test_cases.go utility files?
• Perhaps soon we can have some sort of assertion package to store all the testing assertions as if I used the utils2.go file instead of explain.go file to put the assertion code, would have ended up with with 1700-1800 lines of code in that file, which I am not a big fan of.

How has this been tested?

I have tried many permutations of manually inputting incorrect result to ensure tests don't automatically pass.

[AndrewSisley]

Perhaps soon we can have some sort of assertion package to store all the testing assertions

This could be nice

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #1545 (afcb0ee) into develop (d19bf85) will increase coverage by 0.03%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop    #1545      +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage    72.27%   72.30%   +0.03%     
===========================================
  Files          185      185              
  Lines        18374    18374              
===========================================
+ Hits         13280    13286       +6     
+ Misses        4052     4048       -4     
+ Partials      1042     1040       -2     

see 3 files with indirect coverage changes

[AndrewSisley]

Looks good to me, good job getting all this sorted!

[shahzadlone]

Looks good to me, good job getting all this sorted!

Speedy, I didn't even ping any reviewers yet haha.

BTW I think the new integration runs change detection on explain (and fails). I forgot if turning it off previously was intentional.

[fredcarle]

I like to see more lines removed than added 🙌

[AndrewSisley]

Speedy, I didn't even ping any reviewers yet haha.

I thought you had - I got an email notifiication lol

BTW I think the new integration runs change detection on explain (and fails). I forgot if turning it off previously was intentional.

They should pass, I was having a look as to why they are failing

[shahzadlone]

I thought you had - I got an email notifiication lol

LOL odd, I don't think I did. But worked for the best :)

They should pass, I was having a look as to why they are failing

Documented, this is probably because explain tests didn't run with change detection before (were skipped).