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.

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

test: add unit-test for hasPort method #1654

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 10, 2018

Conversation

forienlauo
Copy link
Contributor

Ⅰ. Describe what this PR did

#1641: add unit-test for hasPort method

Ⅱ. Does this pull request fix one issue?

NONE

Ⅲ. Describe how you did it

NONE

Ⅳ. Describe how to verify it

NONE

Ⅴ. Special notes for reviews

NONE

@CLAassistant
Copy link

CLAassistant commented Jul 9, 2018

CLA assistant check
All committers have signed the CLA.

@pouchrobot
Copy link
Collaborator

We found this is your first time to contribute to Pouch, @forienlauo
👏 We really appreciate it.
Just remind that you have read the contribution guide: https://github.com/alibaba/pouch/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md
If you didn't, you should do that first. If done, welcome again and please enjoy hacking! 🍻

@codecov-io
Copy link

codecov-io commented Jul 9, 2018

Codecov Report

Merging #1654 into master will decrease coverage by 0.02%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1654      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   41.16%   41.14%   -0.03%     
==========================================
  Files         274      274              
  Lines       18091    18091              
==========================================
- Hits         7447     7443       -4     
- Misses       9729     9734       +5     
+ Partials      915      914       -1
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
ctrd/image.go 75.27% <0%> (-2.75%) ⬇️
daemon/mgr/system.go 75% <0%> (-1.73%) ⬇️
ctrd/image_proxy_util.go 9.37% <0%> (+1.56%) ⬆️
daemon/logger/jsonfile/utils.go 73.17% <0%> (+1.62%) ⬆️

@allencloud
Copy link
Collaborator

Oh, actually this is pr which does the same thing as #1668. But this is much better I think. In addition this is done much earlier. What should we do? @HusterWan @fuweid

@allencloud
Copy link
Collaborator

LGTM

@pouchrobot pouchrobot added the LGTM one maintainer or community participant agrees to merge the pull reuqest. label Jul 10, 2018
@allencloud allencloud merged commit 50e9cfb into AliyunContainerService:master Jul 10, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
areas/test LGTM one maintainer or community participant agrees to merge the pull reuqest. size/S
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants