Skip to content

Conversation

@thaJeztah
Copy link
Member

While there may be reasons to keep pkg/errors in production code,
we don't need them for these tests.

Signed-off-by: Sebastiaan van Stijn <[email protected]>
While there may be reasons to keep pkg/errors in production code,
we don't need them for these tests.

Signed-off-by: Sebastiaan van Stijn <[email protected]>
@thaJeztah thaJeztah added status/2-code-review area/testing kind/refactor PR's that refactor, or clean-up code labels Feb 1, 2025
@thaJeztah thaJeztah added this to the 28.0.0 milestone Feb 1, 2025
@thaJeztah thaJeztah self-assigned this Feb 1, 2025
@thaJeztah thaJeztah requested review from a team and silvin-lubecki as code owners February 1, 2025 14:54
@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Feb 1, 2025

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 0% with 5 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 59.42%. Comparing base (bdd70c1) to head (2e26ce1).
Report is 20 commits behind head on master.

❌ Your patch status has failed because the patch coverage (0.00%) is below the target coverage (50.00%). You can increase the patch coverage or adjust the target coverage.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #5781   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   59.42%   59.42%           
=======================================
  Files         347      347           
  Lines       29402    29402           
=======================================
  Hits        17472    17472           
  Misses      10958    10958           
  Partials      972      972           

While there may be reasons to keep pkg/errors in production code,
we don't need them for these tests.

Signed-off-by: Sebastiaan van Stijn <[email protected]>
While there may be reasons to keep pkg/errors in production code,
we don't need them for these tests.

Signed-off-by: Sebastiaan van Stijn <[email protected]>
While there may be reasons to keep pkg/errors in production code,
we don't need them for these tests.

Signed-off-by: Sebastiaan van Stijn <[email protected]>
While there may be reasons to keep pkg/errors in production code,
we don't need them for these tests.

Signed-off-by: Sebastiaan van Stijn <[email protected]>
While there may be reasons to keep pkg/errors in production code,
we don't need them for these tests.

Signed-off-by: Sebastiaan van Stijn <[email protected]>
While there may be reasons to keep pkg/errors in production code,
we don't need them for these tests.

Signed-off-by: Sebastiaan van Stijn <[email protected]>
While there may be reasons to keep pkg/errors in production code,
we don't need them for these tests.

Signed-off-by: Sebastiaan van Stijn <[email protected]>
While there may be reasons to keep pkg/errors in production code,
we don't need them for these tests.

Signed-off-by: Sebastiaan van Stijn <[email protected]>
While there may be reasons to keep pkg/errors in production code,
we don't need them for these tests.

Signed-off-by: Sebastiaan van Stijn <[email protected]>
While there may be reasons to keep pkg/errors in production code,
we don't need them for these tests.

Signed-off-by: Sebastiaan van Stijn <[email protected]>
While there may be reasons to keep pkg/errors in production code,
we don't need them for these tests.

Signed-off-by: Sebastiaan van Stijn <[email protected]>
While there may be reasons to keep pkg/errors in production code,
we don't need them for these tests.

Signed-off-by: Sebastiaan van Stijn <[email protected]>
While there may be reasons to keep pkg/errors in production code,
we don't need them for these tests.

Signed-off-by: Sebastiaan van Stijn <[email protected]>
While there may be reasons to keep pkg/errors in production code,
we don't need them for these tests.

Signed-off-by: Sebastiaan van Stijn <[email protected]>
While there may be reasons to keep pkg/errors in production code,
we don't need them for these tests.

Signed-off-by: Sebastiaan van Stijn <[email protected]>
@thaJeztah
Copy link
Member Author

Flaky test?

64.66 === Failed
64.66 === FAIL: cli/command/volume TestVolumePrunePromptTerminate (0.00s)
64.66     prune_test.go:206: assertion failed: error is "volume prune has been cancelled" (errdefs.errCancelled), not "prompt terminated" (command.ErrPromptTerminated errdefs.errCancelled

While there may be reasons to keep pkg/errors in production code,
we don't need them for these tests.

Signed-off-by: Sebastiaan van Stijn <[email protected]>
While there may be reasons to keep pkg/errors in production code,
we don't need them for these tests.

Signed-off-by: Sebastiaan van Stijn <[email protected]>
@Benehiko
Copy link
Member

Benehiko commented Feb 3, 2025

Flaky test?

64.66 === Failed
64.66 === FAIL: cli/command/volume TestVolumePrunePromptTerminate (0.00s)
64.66     prune_test.go:206: assertion failed: error is "volume prune has been cancelled" (errdefs.errCancelled), not "prompt terminated" (command.ErrPromptTerminated errdefs.errCancelled

haven't seen this one fail before 🤔

@thaJeztah
Copy link
Member Author

haven't seen this one fail before 🤔

Yeah, not sure either; but for those, I usually start with putting a comment on the PR; if we see it fail again, that can help find back "did it fail before?" to see if it's flaky.

@thaJeztah
Copy link
Member Author

Let me bring this one in; I may have some other things stashed locally 😂

@thaJeztah thaJeztah merged commit 4d7fe01 into docker:master Feb 3, 2025
89 checks passed
@thaJeztah thaJeztah deleted the less_pkg_errors branch February 3, 2025 09:56
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

area/testing kind/refactor PR's that refactor, or clean-up code status/2-code-review

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants