-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 93
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
SONARPY-2462: Parallelize the qa_plugin tests #2248
Conversation
46c733b
to
b230586
Compare
import org.junit.jupiter.api.Test; | ||
import org.junit.jupiter.api.extension.RegisterExtension; | ||
import org.sonarqube.ws.Issues; | ||
|
||
import static com.sonar.python.it.plugin.TestsUtils.issues; | ||
import static org.assertj.core.api.Assertions.assertThat; | ||
|
||
@Disabled |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Was that test not run before? And it's actually failing?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As far as I can tell, it wasn't run before. I've tried running this test on master and it failed as well. So, it seems that it failing is not connected to changes made in this PR.
@BeforeAll | ||
static void startServer() { | ||
@Test | ||
void test() { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Running the test locally, the issues do look legit. We could update the assertions (I believe asserting an empty list of issue was a mistake).
We can do that here or in a separate PR, as you prefer.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'll change the assertion. I think it should be doable in this PR
fefaba2
to
81fd0ff
Compare
e9613cc
to
cbaa5a5
Compare
cbaa5a5
to
dbcef7f
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Small comment on unsued method.
LGTM otherwise, great work!
return new ConcurrentOrchestratorExtensionBuilder(Configuration.createEnv()); | ||
} | ||
|
||
public static ConcurrentOrchestratorExtensionBuilder builder(Configuration config) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This seems unused, do we need it?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Good catch. You're right, we don't need it. thx
Quality Gate passedIssues Measures |
SONARPY-2462