Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

fixed test for experiments #2921

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 17, 2024
Merged

fixed test for experiments #2921

merged 1 commit into from
Jun 17, 2024

Conversation

rsun19
Copy link
Contributor

@rsun19 rsun19 commented Jun 17, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Closes:RHOAIENG-8678

Description

I made the last run created at date more dynamic so that it wouldn't break after a set number of months.

How Has This Been Tested?

npm run test:cypress-ci -- --spec "**/experiments.cy.ts"

Test Impact

This is the test

Request review criteria:

Self checklist (all need to be checked):

  • The developer has manually tested the changes and verified that the changes work
  • Commits have been squashed into descriptive, self-contained units of work (e.g. 'WIP' and 'Implements feedback' style messages have been removed)
  • Testing instructions have been added in the PR body (for PRs involving changes that are not immediately obvious).
  • The developer has added tests or explained why testing cannot be added (unit or cypress tests for related changes)

If you have UI changes:

  • Included any necessary screenshots or gifs if it was a UI change.
  • Included tags to the UX team if it was a UI/UX change (find relevant UX in the SMEs section).

After the PR is posted & before it merges:

  • The developer has tested their solution on a cluster by using the image produced by the PR to main

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot requested review from mturley and pnaik1 June 17, 2024 20:52
@rsun19
Copy link
Contributor Author

rsun19 commented Jun 17, 2024

@christianvogt

@christianvogt
Copy link
Contributor

ran cypress test locally
/lgtm
/approve

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm label Jun 17, 2024
@openshift-ci OpenShift CI
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jun 17, 2024

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: christianvogt

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@codecov Codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jun 17, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 78.52%. Comparing base (c9ec3f9) to head (261ca33).

Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #2921      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   78.51%   78.52%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files        1139     1139              
  Lines       24171    24171              
  Branches     6099     6099              
==========================================
+ Hits        18977    18981       +4     
+ Misses       5194     5190       -4

see 5 files with indirect coverage changes

Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update c9ec3f9...261ca33. Read the comment docs.

@openshift-merge-bot openshift-merge-bot bot merged commit 408cb31 into opendatahub-io:main Jun 17, 2024
8 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@mturley mturley Awaiting requested review from mturley

@pnaik1 pnaik1 Awaiting requested review from pnaik1

Assignees

@christianvogt christianvogt

Labels
approved lgtm
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@rsun19 @christianvogt