Closed Thanhphan1147 closed 1 year ago
Test coverage for 0e1aaee74ff451d83343fdd88b075e44abce84a5
Name Stmts Miss Branch BrPart Cover Missing
---------------------------------------------------------------
src/charm.py 521 37 168 29 90% 197-200, 551, 582, 628, 663-664, 715-722, 727, 829->834, 833, 835, 840-841, 901, 919, 926, 1018, 1027, 1039, 1060, 1069, 1088, 1092, 1121, 1174, 1306, 1328, 1335->1337, 1380->exit, 1392, 1424, 1433-1434
src/cos.py 15 0 0 0 100%
src/exceptions.py 17 1 2 1 89% 41
src/types_.py 15 0 0 0 100%
---------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL 568 38 170 30 90%
Static code analysis report
Run started:2023-10-24 07:56:39.328817
Test results:
No issues identified.
Code scanned:
Total lines of code: 4250
Total lines skipped (#nosec): 1
Total potential issues skipped due to specifically being disabled (e.g., #nosec BXXX): 0
Run metrics:
Total issues (by severity):
Undefined: 0
Low: 0
Medium: 0
High: 0
Total issues (by confidence):
Undefined: 0
Low: 0
Medium: 0
High: 0
Files skipped (0):
Overview
Currently we are not using operator-workflows for tests that requires secrets even though support for this has been added. We should remove the integration-tests-with-secrets job by leveraging Add secret arguments to integration tests by yhaliaw · Pull Request #176 · canonical/operator-workflows.
To do this we’d need to define the INTEGRATION_TEST_ARGS secret and remove the -m "not (requires_secret)" arg in the integration-tests job. Example:Refactor integration test wfs by arturo-seijas · Pull Request #316 · canonical/indico-operator
Checklist
src-docs
urgent
,trivial
,complex
)