Closed warber closed 3 months ago
1 892 tests +9 1 891 :white_check_mark: +8 27s :stopwatch: -1s 133 suites ±0 1 :zzz: +1 1 files ±0 0 :x: ±0
Results for commit f1fd459f. ± Comparison against base commit cf921cf4.
:recycle: This comment has been updated with latest results.
4 files - 1 268 suites - 133 23m 52s :stopwatch: - 40m 48s 2 002 tests + 5 2 001 :white_check_mark: + 5 1 :zzz: ±0 0 :x: ±0 2 104 runs - 97 2 103 :white_check_mark: - 97 1 :zzz: ±0 0 :x: ±0
Results for commit cfd8ef77. ± Comparison against base commit d6deb222.
Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues
Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code
What this PR does / Why we need it:
This, PR contains a quick fix for validating name parameters of classic configs. First, we try to resolve the name parameters and compare their values. If resolving the paramters didn't work (because of missing resolved entities) we check if both parameters are reference parameters and assume that they will resolve to the same name if they look exactly the same. The same check is also done if both paramters are of type "compoundParameter".
Note that this check misses the situation where compound parameters point to local reference parameters that resolves to different values tho. There is a test case which should cover this case. Currently it is skipped. https://github.com/Dynatrace/dynatrace-configuration-as-code/pull/1530/files#diff-12f7b59badc043a408921cbc6e7416edc7623283f022bb7971b7f9ae5d18305bR218
Special notes for your reviewer:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?