Skip to content

Conversation

danhellem
Copy link
Contributor

@danhellem danhellem commented Aug 13, 2025

add additional test coverage for missing code blocks in work items

GitHub issue number

Associated Risks

N/A

PR Checklist

  • I have read the contribution guidelines
  • I have read the code of conduct guidelines
  • Title of the pull request is clear and informative.
  • 👌 Code hygiene
  • 🔭 Telemetry added, updated, or N/A
  • 📄 Documentation added, updated, or N/A
  • 🛡️ Automated tests added, or N/A

🧪 How did you test it?

re-run of automated tests

@danhellem danhellem requested a review from a team as a code owner August 13, 2025 18:35
@danhellem danhellem self-assigned this Aug 13, 2025
@danhellem danhellem added the Waiting for Merge 🚘 waiting for pull request to merge label Aug 13, 2025
Copy link

Dependency Review

✅ No vulnerabilities or license issues or OpenSSF Scorecard issues found.

Scanned Files

None

Copy link
Contributor

@polatengin polatengin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

👍

@danhellem danhellem merged commit 3b23e90 into main Aug 13, 2025
15 checks passed
@danhellem danhellem deleted the users/danhellem/work-item-test-coverage-1 branch August 13, 2025 18:49
Copy link
Collaborator

@Novaes Novaes left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM 👍

rel: "ArtifactLink",
url: "vstfs:///Build/Build/456",
attributes: {
name: "Found in build",
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

this object seem same as above. Can we just have a static factory for those in case we change the name newBuildAddOpExepctedResponse(name) or smth like this

const [, , , handler] = call;

const mockWorkItem = { id: 1234, fields: { "System.Title": "Test Item" } };
mockWorkItemTrackingApi.updateWorkItem.mockResolvedValue(mockWorkItem);
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'd move code to make //Given // When // Then, or // Given // When // Test // Verify meaning defining variables at first, then mocking, on test you can assert and on verify, verify it.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Waiting for Merge 🚘 waiting for pull request to merge

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants