✨ Add tests for graphQL costs #1643
Conversation
azeemshaikh38
requested review from
inferno-chromium,
justaugustus,
laurentsimon and
naveensrinivasan
as code owners
|
Integration tests success for |
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1643 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 56.12% 58.97% +2.84%
==========================================
Files 72 72
Lines 6493 6493
==========================================
+ Hits 3644 3829 +185
+ Misses 2604 2413 -191
- Partials 245 251 +6 |
azeemshaikh38
force-pushed
the
azeems/e2e
branch
from
efdbb40
to
d91ca5a
Compare
|
Integration tests success for |
azeemshaikh38
force-pushed
the
azeems/e2e
branch
from
d91ca5a
to
981f99d
Compare
|
Integration tests success for |
azeemshaikh38
force-pushed
the
azeems/e2e
branch
from
981f99d
to
387e188
Compare
|
Integration tests success for |
| @@ -261,7 +261,7 @@ test: $(test-targets) | |||
| unit-test: ## Runs unit test without e2e | |||
| # Run unit tests, ignoring e2e tests | |||
| # run the go tests and gen the file coverage-all used to do the integration with codecov | |||
| go test -race -covermode=atomic -coverprofile=unit-coverage.out `go list ./... | grep -v e2e` | |||
| SKIP_GINKGO=1 go test -race -covermode=atomic -coverprofile=unit-coverage.out `go list ./...` | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is there a reason these e2e tests couldn't sit in the e2e dir?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@06kellyjac Nice suggestion, Thanks. Do you want to do a PR for the change?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The tests added in this PR rely on some internal (non-exposed) fields. So, had to create the tests in the same package as it was testing.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
fair enough, thanks for the details
What kind of change does this PR introduce? (Bug fix, feature, docs update, ...)
Closes BUG: Fixer high GitHub API usage #1623
Does this PR introduce a breaking change? (What changes might users need to make in their application due to this PR?)
No.