chore(go): remove testify for test assertions

[hugoaguirre]

Keep the test assertions using plain if/else blocks.

Checklist (if applicable):

• PR title is following https://www.conventionalcommits.org/en/v1.0.0/
• Tested (manually, unit tested, etc.)
• Docs updated (updated docs or a docs bug required)

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @hugoaguirre, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request streamlines the Go codebase by eliminating the testify assertion library, opting instead for the standard library's testing package for all test assertions. This change simplifies the project's dependency graph, reduces potential external library overhead, and promotes a consistent testing methodology using built-in Go features. The refactoring involved updating numerous test files to align with this new approach, alongside minor dependency updates for the Google AI client library.

Highlights

• Dependency Reduction: The external github.com/stretchr/testify assertion library and its transitive dependencies (github.com/davecgh/go-spew, github.com/pmezard/go-difflib) have been completely removed from the project's go.mod file.
• Standardized Test Assertions: All test files across various plugins and samples have been refactored to replace testify assertions (e.g., assert.Equal, require.NoError, assert.Contains) with native Go testing package constructs like if/else blocks combined with t.Error, t.Errorf, t.Fatal, and t.Fatalf.
• Go Module Updates: The google.golang.org/genai dependency has been updated to v1.41.0 in several go.mod and go.sum files, ensuring the use of the latest version of the Google AI client library.

🧠 New Feature in Public Preview: You can now enable Memory to help Gemini Code Assist learn from your team's feedback. This makes future code reviews more consistent and personalized to your project's style. Click here to enable Memory in your admin console.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request removes the testify dependency from the Go tests, replacing its assertion functions with standard Go testing constructs like if/else blocks and t.Error/t.Fatal. The changes are largely consistent and well-executed. I've identified a few instances where require assertions (which cause fatal test failures) were replaced with non-fatal t.Error or t.Errorf assertions. I've suggested using t.Fatal or t.Fatalf in these cases to maintain the original fail-fast behavior of the tests. Overall, this is a solid refactoring effort.