Increase test coverage on Jib Builder#2383
Increase test coverage on Jib Builder#2383dgageot merged 1 commit intoGoogleContainerTools:masterfrom
Conversation
dgageot
requested review from
TadCordle,
balopat,
briandealwis,
chanseokoh,
loosebazooka,
nkubala,
priyawadhwa and
tejal29
as code owners
Codecov Report
|
Signed-off-by: David Gageot <david@gageot.net>
| { | ||
| description: "local build", | ||
| artifact: &latest.JibGradleArtifact{}, | ||
| cmd: testutil.FakeRun(t, "gradle -Djib.console=plain :jibDockerBuild --image=img:tag"), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not sure how this testing framework works: Are we verifying that the code creates the command defined in FakeRun "gradle -Djib.console=plain :jibDockerBuild --image=img:tag"?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It’s checking that command and only this one runs
There was a problem hiding this comment.
kinda like a Mockito.when().then()?
|
@TadCordle should be good now. Thanks for the review! |
loosebazooka
left a comment
loosebazooka
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good, should we also be covering the remote case?
| { | ||
| description: "local build", | ||
| artifact: &latest.JibGradleArtifact{}, | ||
| cmd: testutil.FakeRun(t, "gradle -Djib.console=plain :jibDockerBuild --image=img:tag"), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
kinda like a Mockito.when().then()?
|
Don’t worry, I’m working on the remote case but I’d rather get this merged first |
|
Is jib team not owners? |
|
That would make sense but the file pattern |
5 participants
Signed-off-by: David Gageot david@gageot.net