-
Couldn't load subscription status.
- Fork 56
test: Fix tests which are failing in the latest nightly [skip tests] #4565
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
Conversation
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.
Pull Request Overview
This PR addresses test failures in the latest nightly build by adjusting test expectations for version-specific behavior changes in Fluent 26.1. The changes add version checks to skip or modify assertions that no longer apply to the newer version.
- Added version guard for exception behavior test that no longer throws in v26.1 (Fluent bug 1354052)
- Changed strict equality check to superset check for command names in v25.1+
- Added version guard for list command argument assertion that changed in v26.1
Reviewed Changes
Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.
| File | Description |
|---|---|
| tests/test_session.py | Added version check to skip exception test for v26.1+ due to known Fluent bug |
| tests/test_flobject.py | Modified command names assertion to use superset check and added version guard for list command behavior |
Tip: Customize your code reviews with copilot-instructions.md. Create the file or learn how to get started.
tests/test_flobject.py
Outdated
| "delete", | ||
| "rename", | ||
| "list", | ||
| "list_properties", |
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.
In 26.1, above 2 commands are replaced with base class methods
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.
Copilot encountered an error and was unable to review this pull request. You can try again by re-requesting a review.
71ae17e to
cbecf82
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.
Copilot encountered an error and was unable to review this pull request. You can try again by re-requesting a review.
4b9c157 to
6b7b609
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.
Copilot encountered an error and was unable to review this pull request. You can try again by re-requesting a review.
e7fbc31 to
7f60a5c
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.
Copilot encountered an error and was unable to review this pull request. You can try again by re-requesting a review.
|
@mkundu1, This is working fine with me with this week's image: |
I'm not able to reproduce tests/test_field_data.py::test_field_data_errors's failure (yet).