Add unit tests for ActionManagementAuditLogger class

Shenali-SJ commented 1 week ago

Proposed changes in this pull request

This PR adds unit tests for the ActionManagementAuditLogger class.

Related Issue:

https://github.com/wso2/product-is/issues/21368

Related PR:

https://github.com/wso2/carbon-identity-framework/pull/6008

Checklist (for reviewing)

General

[ ] Is this PR explained thoroughly? All code changes must be accounted for in the PR description.
[ ] Is the PR labeled correctly?

Functionality

[ ] Are all requirements met? Compare implemented functionality with the requirements specification.
[ ] Does the UI work as expected? There should be no Javascript errors in the console; all resources should load. There should be no unexpected errors. Deliberately try to break the feature to find out if there are corner cases that are not handled.

Code

[ ] Do you fully understand the introduced changes to the code? If not ask for clarification, it might uncover ways to solve a problem in a more elegant and efficient way.
[ ] Does the PR introduce any inefficient database requests? Use the debug server to check for duplicate requests.
[ ] Are all necessary strings marked for translation? All strings that are exposed to users via the UI must be marked for translation.

Tests

[ ] Are there sufficient test cases? Ensure that all components are tested individually; models, forms, and serializers should be tested in isolation even if a test for a view covers these components.
[ ] If this is a bug fix, are tests for the issue in place? There must be a test case for the bug to ensure the issue won’t regress. Make sure that the tests break without the new code to fix the issue.
[ ] If this is a new feature or a significant change to an existing feature? has the manual testing spreadsheet been updated with instructions for manual testing?

Security

[ ] Confirm this PR doesn't commit any keys, passwords, tokens, usernames, or other secrets.
[ ] Are all UI and API inputs run through forms or serializers?
[ ] Are all external inputs validated and sanitized appropriately?
[ ] Does all branching logic have a default case?
[ ] Does this solution handle outliers and edge cases gracefully?
[ ] Are all external communications secured and restricted to SSL?

Documentation

[ ] Are changes to the UI documented in the platform docs? If this PR introduces new platform site functionality or changes existing ones, the changes should be documented.
[ ] Are changes to the API documented in the API docs? If this PR introduces new API functionality or changes existing ones, the changes must be documented.
[ ] Are reusable components documented? If this PR introduces components that are relevant to other developers (for instance a mixin for a view or a generic form) they should be documented in the Wiki.

codecov[bot] commented 1 week ago

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:

Project coverage is 41.39%. Comparing base (fb21729) to head (40e7614). Report is 49 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## master #6130 +/- ## ============================================ + Coverage 40.88% 41.39% +0.51% - Complexity 14516 14948 +432 ============================================ Files 1772 1775 +3 Lines 117769 121093 +3324 Branches 19116 20040 +924 ============================================ + Hits 48146 50123 +1977 - Misses 62316 63523 +1207 - Partials 7307 7447 +140 ``` | [Flag](https://app.codecov.io/gh/wso2/carbon-identity-framework/pull/6130/flags?src=pr&el=flags&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=wso2) | Coverage Δ | | |---|---|---| | [unit](https://app.codecov.io/gh/wso2/carbon-identity-framework/pull/6130/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=wso2) | `25.61% <ø> (+0.53%)` | :arrow_up: | Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. [Click here](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/carryforward-flags?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=wso2#carryforward-flags-in-the-pull-request-comment) to find out more.

:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚨 Try these New Features: