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

Add unit test to query_test to up coverage #983

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 7, 2022

Conversation

perdasilva
Copy link
Contributor

Signed-off-by: perdasilva perdasilva@redhat.com

Description of the change:
Adds a unit test to query_test.go to improve the code coverage

Motivation for the change:

Reviewer Checklist

  • Implementation matches the proposed design, or proposal is updated to match implementation
  • Sufficient unit test coverage
  • Sufficient end-to-end test coverage
  • Docs updated or added to /docs
  • Commit messages sensible and descriptive

Signed-off-by: perdasilva <perdasilva@redhat.com>
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jul 4, 2022

Codecov Report

Merging #983 (abb4d1f) into master (8250533) will increase coverage by 0.02%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

❗ Current head abb4d1f differs from pull request most recent head 716dbd1. Consider uploading reports for the commit 716dbd1 to get more accurate results

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #983      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   52.60%   52.62%   +0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         104      104              
  Lines        9422     9422              
==========================================
+ Hits         4956     4958       +2     
+ Misses       3536     3535       -1     
+ Partials      930      929       -1     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
pkg/registry/query.go 61.45% <0.00%> (+0.52%) ⬆️
alpha/veneer/semver/semver.go 58.79% <0.00%> (+0.54%) ⬆️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 8250533...716dbd1. Read the comment docs.

@grokspawn
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jul 7, 2022
@joelanford
Copy link
Member

/approve

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jul 7, 2022

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: grokspawn, joelanford, perdasilva

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

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Jul 7, 2022
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot merged commit 2d33c48 into operator-framework:master Jul 7, 2022
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.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants