| FazBrowse GitHub Viewer | Trending | | Home |
| Tools: [Download Repo ZIP] [Original HTTPS Page] |
|
In #2080 (comment), you mentioned there are other tests that cover this case? Otherwise LGTM. I agree we need to get the build green with as few logical gaps in test coverage as possible. I wonder if we should have some kind of secondary set of system tests? It might be nice to track these kinds of issues for the upstream guys? |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
@daspecster Another option would be to mark the test with @unittest.expectedFailure. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
@dhermes WDYT of leaving it in place, but decorating it with @unittest.expected_failure? The back-end folks could use to to investigate, and meanwhile we would be green. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
Seems mostly OK. But an issue needs to be filed to follow up and fix it. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
OK |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
I just backed out the "delete the test" change and marked it with unittest.expectedFailure. I also dropped the self.assertFalse(topic.exists()) (see #2111). |
Sorry, something went wrong.
| def test_list_subscriptions(self): | ||
| TOPIC_NAME = 'list-sub' + unique_resource_id('-') | ||
| topic = Config.CLIENT.topic(TOPIC_NAME) | ||
| self.assertFalse(retry_unavailable(topic.exists)()) |
|
Go ahead and merge |
Sorry, something went wrong.
| Back | FazBrowse Home | New Git URL |
See:
#2080 (comment)
Closes #2080.