-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 28
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
Convert windows line ending and previous PR #276
Conversation
Signed-off-by: pem70 <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: pem70 <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: pem70 <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: pem70 <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: pem70 <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: pem70 <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: pem70 <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: pem70 <[email protected]>
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #276 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 86.21% 89.28% +3.06%
==========================================
Files 35 53 +18
Lines 2292 2519 +227
==========================================
+ Hits 1976 2249 +273
+ Misses 316 270 -46
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
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.
Looks pretty good, thanks for restructuring code and tests @pem70! Left a few comments
Signed-off-by: pem70 <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: pem70 <[email protected]>
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.
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.
Looking good so far! 🥳
I'll approve once all PR comments are resolved.
Also, I noticed that you've been trying to keep the two PRs in sync (e.g. logger class changes or test-delete function names). To avoid extra work, you can base your other PR (#277) to this PR's target branch (convert_windows_line_ending
)
logger.error(f"Unknown type is found in schema_json, exc") | ||
raise jsonschema.exceptions.UnknownType(f"Unknown type is found in schema_json, exc") | ||
logger.error(f"Unknown type is found in schema_json, {exc}") | ||
raise jsonschema.exceptions.UnknownType(f"Unknown type is found in schema_json, {exc}") |
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.
Good catch!
Not sure if we should do a quick search across the board to make sure that we are interpolating/inserting the value of the error instead of the literal string of the variable name
from zowe.zos_files_for_zowe_sdk.constants import FileType | ||
from .datasets import Datasets | ||
from .uss import USSFiles | ||
from .file_system import FileSystems | ||
|
||
_ZOWE_FILES_DEFAULT_ENCODING = "utf-8" |
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.
I know all functions in this class are deprecated, but curious if we should also move this into a constansts.py
file.
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.
I'm not sure as I hardly think these imports would be used again in another file.
def list(self, path): | ||
"""Retrieve a list of USS files based on a given pattern. | ||
|
||
Returns | ||
------- | ||
json | ||
A JSON with a list of dataset names matching the given pattern | ||
""" |
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.
I know it may be a little redundant, and Timothy mentioned this offline not long ago...
Also, we don't have to do this as part of this PR.
Q: Should we make sure that the docs are complete and accurate?
- For example, this is missing the parameters.
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.
I think we definitely need to standardize the docs, but maybe not in this PR
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.
Created #279 to track this
Co-authored-by: Fernando Rijo Cedeno <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Peizhao Mei <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: pem70 <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: pem70 <[email protected]>
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, thanks @pem70 for the fix and restructuring! I left a couple comments, but I don't have anything that must be addressed.
Signed-off-by: pem70 <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: pem70 <[email protected]>
Revert changes from previous commit as it would break testing environments. |
This reverts commit e491f73. Signed-off-by: pem70 <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: pem70 <[email protected]>
34a3582
to
736e714
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, thanks @pem70! Will approve after conflicts have been resolved
Signed-off-by: pem70 <[email protected]>
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, thanks @pem70!
What It Does
Fixes [#104]
Address issues [#264] and [#265] by refactoring classes and tests
How to Test
Review Checklist
I certify that I have:
Additional Comments