-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 535
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
Show "pending" activity in devhub for all versions and not just the latest one #22681
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Show "pending" activity in devhub for all versions and not just the latest one #22681
Conversation
@@ -99,6 +99,129 @@ def test_rejected_version_still_valid(self): | |||
assert self.token.is_valid() | |||
|
|||
|
|||
class TestActivityLogManager(TestCase): | |||
def test_pending_for_developer(self): | |||
to_create = ( |
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.
curious why not using a parameterized test here? Again seems to predate but this would parallelize the tests and let each fail independently of the others.
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.
@pytest.mark.parametrize
is not really usable with TestCase
- it wants to feed all the arguments to the function, so that doesn't play well with methods that should receive self
as the first argument.
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.
Right. In those cases I've just used functional tests. Just wondering as I've used it before and wonder if we have a stigma against it or not.
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 don't love @parametrize
because of that limitation (and general awkwardness around how arguments are defined when using it) but nobody would stop you if you were to use it in new code. We do have several already.
Fixes: mozilla/addons#15024
Context
See the issue - without this change, for a given add-on in devhub, only the last version in each channel shows the "pending" activity count. This makes it shown on all versions, while not increasing the query count (plenty more to optimize there though, but out of scope)
Testing
See the issue but also the added tests of the model method + test around the view that were added.