-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 163
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
standardizing contract test names #556
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.
Could you please update the corresponding documentation
Couldn't find any in this repository: |
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.
Standardization is great!
On a related note: When I was first learning how to debug these tests, I was trying to read my SAM logs and did not realize that some of the calls were coming from the test fixture functions. Maybe we can somehow hint to devs that they may have to look at the fixture code too to completely trace exactly what order the function calls are happening in.
@@ -51,14 +51,14 @@ def contract_create_delete(resource_client): | |||
|
|||
@pytest.mark.create | |||
@skip_not_writable_identifier | |||
def contract_create_duplicate(created_resource, resource_client): | |||
def contract_create_create(created_resource, resource_client): |
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.
Gentle reminder- Update any reference to old names in documentation, if not done already.
Co-authored-by: Anshika Garg <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Anshika Garg <[email protected]>
No description provided.