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

refactor: created ClusterChecks and pulled cluster check methods from K8 #1304

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 7, 2025

Conversation

jeromy-cannon
Copy link
Contributor

Description

This pull request changes the following:

  • created ClusterChecks and pulled cluster check methods from K8

Related Issues

@jeromy-cannon jeromy-cannon self-assigned this Feb 6, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Feb 6, 2025

Unit Test Results - Linux

  1 files  ±0   59 suites  ±0   2s ⏱️ -1s
235 tests ±0  235 ✅ ±0  0 💤 ±0  0 ❌ ±0 
240 runs  ±0  240 ✅ ±0  0 💤 ±0  0 ❌ ±0 

Results for commit 3069dfa. ± Comparison against base commit 4beafe2.

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Feb 6, 2025

Unit Test Results - Windows

  1 files  ±0   59 suites  ±0   6s ⏱️ +2s
235 tests ±0  235 ✅ ±0  0 💤 ±0  0 ❌ ±0 
240 runs  ±0  240 ✅ ±0  0 💤 ±0  0 ❌ ±0 

Results for commit 3069dfa. ± Comparison against base commit 4beafe2.

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

@jeromy-cannon jeromy-cannon marked this pull request as ready for review February 6, 2025 23:43
@jeromy-cannon jeromy-cannon requested review from leninmehedy and a team as code owners February 6, 2025 23:43
@jeromy-cannon jeromy-cannon added the PR: Needs Approval A pull request that needs reviews and approvals. label Feb 6, 2025
@nathanklick nathanklick enabled auto-merge February 7, 2025 00:58
@nathanklick nathanklick removed the PR: Needs Approval A pull request that needs reviews and approvals. label Feb 7, 2025
@nathanklick nathanklick disabled auto-merge February 7, 2025 01:11
@nathanklick nathanklick enabled auto-merge February 7, 2025 03:21
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Feb 7, 2025

E2E Test Report

 17 files  126 suites   1h 27m 49s ⏱️
254 tests 254 ✅ 0 💤 0 ❌
265 runs  265 ✅ 0 💤 0 ❌

Results for commit 3069dfa.

1 similar comment
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Feb 7, 2025

E2E Test Report

 17 files  126 suites   1h 27m 49s ⏱️
254 tests 254 ✅ 0 💤 0 ❌
265 runs  265 ✅ 0 💤 0 ❌

Results for commit 3069dfa.

Copy link

Coverage summary from Codacy

See diff coverage on Codacy

Coverage variation Diff coverage
Report missing for 4beafe21 65.50%
Coverage variation details
Coverable lines Covered lines Coverage
Common ancestor commit (4beafe2) Report Missing Report Missing Report Missing
Head commit (3069dfa) 22060 18320 83.05%

Coverage variation is the difference between the coverage for the head and common ancestor commits of the pull request branch: <coverage of head commit> - <coverage of common ancestor commit>

Diff coverage details
Coverable lines Covered lines Diff coverage
Pull request (#1304) 171 112 65.50%

Diff coverage is the percentage of lines that are covered by tests out of the coverable lines that the pull request added or modified: <covered lines added or modified>/<coverable lines added or modified> * 100%

See your quality gate settings    Change summary preferences

Codacy stopped sending the deprecated coverage status on June 5th, 2024. Learn more

Footnotes

  1. Codacy didn't receive coverage data for the commit, or there was an error processing the received data. Check your integration for errors and validate that your coverage setup is correct.

@nathanklick nathanklick added this pull request to the merge queue Feb 7, 2025
Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 7, 2025

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 63.74269% with 62 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 82.07%. Comparing base (938a956) to head (3069dfa).
Report is 4 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
src/core/cluster_checks.ts 61.93% 57 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
src/commands/cluster/tasks.ts 57.14% 3 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1304      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   81.76%   82.07%   +0.30%     
==========================================
  Files          96      104       +8     
  Lines       21786    22060     +274     
  Branches     2078     2115      +37     
==========================================
+ Hits        17813    18105     +292     
+ Misses       3787     3775      -12     
+ Partials      186      180       -6     
Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
src/commands/explorer.ts 76.01% <100.00%> (+0.20%) ⬆️
src/core/container_init.ts 94.36% <100.00%> (+0.20%) ⬆️
src/core/kube/k8_client.ts 92.09% <100.00%> (+9.01%) ⬆️
src/commands/cluster/tasks.ts 85.71% <57.14%> (+0.08%) ⬆️
src/core/cluster_checks.ts 61.93% <61.93%> (ø)

... and 11 files with indirect coverage changes

Impacted file tree graph

@github-merge-queue github-merge-queue bot removed this pull request from the merge queue due to no response for status checks Feb 7, 2025
@nathanklick nathanklick added this pull request to the merge queue Feb 7, 2025
@nathanklick nathanklick removed this pull request from the merge queue due to a manual request Feb 7, 2025
@nathanklick nathanklick merged commit 8be61c3 into main Feb 7, 2025
42 of 43 checks passed
@nathanklick nathanklick deleted the 01265-cluster-checks branch February 7, 2025 04:54
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

create ClusterChecks external to kube folder and migrate methods
3 participants