-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 102
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
Remove explicit passing of event_loop into tests #1006
Conversation
Failures in CI are non-related.
|
... already exists in integration/test_unit
316f968
to
2f7c236
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.
LGTM presuming integration tests pass
Should this be targeting 2.9, and be merged forward? |
I didn't think that it was happening in 2.9, but looks like it is. Well we can backport this no problem I think because there's no functionality change, just removing an argument wouldn't result it any conflicts. |
/merge |
#1024 ## What's Changed * Remove paramiko upper-bound by @gboutry in #1005 * Remove explicit passing of event_loop into tests by @cderici in #1006 * chore: remove the upper restrictions on the websockets dependency by @tonyandrewmeyer in #1007 * Target ceiling version by @cderici in #1008 * Make it easier to run tests using `make` by @cderici in #1012 * Avoid installing signal handlers to the event loop by @cderici in #1014 * feat: remove app block until done by @yanksyoon in #1017 * feat: remove app timeout by @yanksyoon in #1018 * Forward port latest changes from 2.9 onto 3.x by @cderici in #1022 #### Notes & Discussion JUJU-5414
Description
This clears up from the test output the flood of warnings from pytest that looks like (e.g. example):
QA Steps
No functionality changes. Though there were a couple of tests that I needed to manually get the running loop (where the test actually was using the
event_loop
), so we need to make sure those are still passing.Notes & Discussions
Maybe need to be back-ported? I'm not sure yet.