add xUnit project and some cleanup #11
Conversation
WalkthroughThe pull request introduces significant updates to the Changes
Possibly related PRs
Poem
Warning Rate limit exceeded@santoshyadavdev has exceeded the limit for the number of commits or files that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait 1 minutes and 40 seconds before requesting another review. ⌛ How to resolve this issue?After the wait time has elapsed, a review can be triggered using the We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit. 🚦 How do rate limits work?CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization. Our paid plans have higher rate limits than the trial, open-source and free plans. In all cases, we re-allow further reviews after a brief timeout. Please see our FAQ for further information. Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
devs-who-run-api/Modules/MembersModule.cs (1)
78-78: Consider architectural improvements for member retrieval endpoints.While the route organization is clear, consider these improvements:
- Consolidate similar member retrieval endpoints
- Standardize response types
- Add OpenAPI documentation
Example implementation:
+ /// <summary> + /// Retrieves a member by their identifier or email. + /// </summary> + /// <param name="identifier">Member ID or email address</param> + /// <response code="200">Member found</response> + /// <response code="404">Member not found</response> app.MapGet("/member/{identifier}", async (string identifier, DevsWhoRunDbContext db) => { + var query = int.TryParse(identifier, out var id) + ? db.Members.Where(m => m.Id == id) + : db.Members.Where(m => m.Email == identifier); + + var member = await query.SingleOrDefaultAsync(); + return member is not null + ? Results.Ok(new ApiResponse<Member>(member)) + : Results.NotFound(new ApiResponse<Member>("Member not found")); }) + .WithName("GetMember") + .WithOpenApi(); - app.MapGet("/memberByEmail/{email}", async (string email, DevsWhoRunDbContext db) => - { - var member = await db.Members.SingleOrDefaultAsync(m => m.Email == email); - return member is not null ? Results.Ok(member) : Results.NotFound(); - });
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
devs-who-run-api/DevsWhoRunDBContext.cs(0 hunks)devs-who-run-api/Modules/MembersModule.cs(2 hunks)
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (1)
- devs-who-run-api/DevsWhoRunDBContext.cs
| var isEmailExist = await db.Members.AnyAsync(m => m.Email == member.Email); | ||
| if(isEmailExist) | ||
| if (isEmailExist) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Improve email uniqueness check reliability.
The current email existence check has potential issues:
- Case sensitivity might allow duplicate emails (e.g., "User@example.com" vs "user@example.com")
- Race conditions could occur between the check and insert
Consider these improvements:
- var isEmailExist = await db.Members.AnyAsync(m => m.Email == member.Email);
+ var normalizedEmail = member.Email.ToLowerInvariant();
+ var isEmailExist = await db.Members.AnyAsync(m =>
+ EF.Functions.Collate(m.Email, "nocase") == normalizedEmail);Also, consider adding a unique index on the email column:
CREATE UNIQUE INDEX ix_members_email_unique
ON Members (LOWER(Email));| @@ -48,9 +48,9 @@ public override void AddRoutes(IEndpointRouteBuilder app) | |||
|
|
|||
| if (string.IsNullOrEmpty(member.Email)) | |||
| return Results.BadRequest("Email is required"); | |||
|
|
|||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Enhance input validation for member creation endpoint.
Consider implementing additional validation checks for security and data integrity:
- Add email format validation
- Validate other required member properties
- Implement input sanitization
- Consider rate limiting for spam prevention
Here's a suggested implementation using FluentValidation:
+ using FluentValidation;
+ public class MemberValidator : AbstractValidator<Member>
+ {
+ public MemberValidator()
+ {
+ RuleFor(x => x.Email)
+ .NotEmpty()
+ .EmailAddress()
+ .MaximumLength(100);
+ // Add rules for other required properties
+ }
+ }
app.MapPost("/member", async (Member member, DevsWhoRunDbContext db) =>
{
- if (member is null)
- return Results.BadRequest("Member data is required");
-
- if (string.IsNullOrEmpty(member.Email))
- return Results.BadRequest("Email is required");
+ var validator = new MemberValidator();
+ var validationResult = await validator.ValidateAsync(member);
+
+ if (!validationResult.IsValid)
+ return Results.BadRequest(validationResult.Errors);Committable suggestion skipped: line range outside the PR's diff.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (4)
devs-who-run-test/MemberTest.cs (3)
13-15: Use unique database names for test isolation.Using a fixed database name could cause issues when running tests in parallel. Consider using a unique name per test.
- .UseInMemoryDatabase(databaseName: "TestDatabase") + .UseInMemoryDatabase(databaseName: $"TestDatabase_{Guid.NewGuid()}")
18-22: Consider extracting test data setup to improve maintainability.The test data setup could be improved by:
- Moving test data to a separate helper method or builder class
- Using consistent naming patterns for test data
- Using non-PII like data for tests
Consider creating a helper method:
private static IEnumerable<Member> GetTestMembers() { return new[] { new Member { Id = 1, UserType = UserType.Meetup, Email = "test.meetup@example.com", FirstName = "Test", LastName = "Meetup", GitHubUserName = "@test.meetup" }, new Member { Id = 2, UserType = UserType.Conf, Email = "test.conf@example.com", FirstName = "Test", LastName = "Conf", GitHubUserName = "@test.conf" } }; }
27-31: Consider enhancing assertions with custom messages and additional checks.While the current assertions are good, they could be more comprehensive and provide better failure messages.
Consider enhancing the assertions:
- meetups.Should().NotBeNull(); - meetups.Should().HaveCount(1); - meetups.First().Email.Should().Be("meetup1@test.com"); + meetups.Should().NotBeNull("the query should return a list"); + meetups.Should().HaveCount(1, "only one meetup member was added"); + var meetup = meetups.First(); + meetup.Should().BeEquivalentTo(new + { + Id = 1, + UserType = UserType.Meetup, + Email = "meetup1@test.com", + FirstName = "This is", + LastName = "Learning", + GitHubUserName = "@thisislearning" + }, "all properties should match the test data");devs-who-run-test/devs-who-run-test.csproj (1)
24-26: Consider adding more global usings for commonly used test namespaces.While including Xunit globally is good, consider adding other frequently used test namespaces:
<ItemGroup> <Using Include="Xunit"/> + <Using Include="FluentAssertions"/> + <Using Include="Moq"/> </ItemGroup>
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
devs-who-run-test/MemberTest.cs(1 hunks)devs-who-run-test/devs-who-run-test.csproj(1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (4)
devs-who-run-test/MemberTest.cs (2)
1-5: LGTM! Imports are appropriate and well-organized.
The necessary dependencies for EF Core in-memory testing and FluentAssertions are properly imported.
24-25: LGTM! Query implementation follows best practices.
The async/await usage and LINQ query are properly implemented.
devs-who-run-test/devs-who-run-test.csproj (2)
1-11: LGTM! Well-configured test project properties.
The project configuration follows best practices with appropriate settings for a test project, including:
- Nullable reference types for improved type safety
- Implicit usings for cleaner code
- Correct test project markers
28-30: LGTM! Correct project reference setup.
The reference to the main API project is properly configured with the correct relative path.
| <ItemGroup> | ||
| <PackageReference Include="coverlet.collector" Version="6.0.0"/> | ||
| <PackageReference Include="FluentAssertions" Version="6.12.2" /> | ||
| <PackageReference Include="Microsoft.AspNetCore.Mvc.Testing" Version="8.0.11" /> | ||
| <PackageReference Include="Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore.InMemory" Version="8.0.11" /> | ||
| <PackageReference Include="Microsoft.NET.Test.Sdk" Version="17.8.0"/> | ||
| <PackageReference Include="Moq" Version="4.20.72" /> | ||
| <PackageReference Include="xunit" Version="2.5.3"/> | ||
| <PackageReference Include="xunit.runner.visualstudio" Version="2.5.3"/> | ||
| </ItemGroup> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
Update Moq package to address security vulnerability
The security scan revealed a LOW severity vulnerability in Moq 4.20.72 related to user data hashing. While the current version set is generally well-chosen and compatible, Moq needs an update.
- Update
Moqpackage from version 4.20.72 to at least version 4.20.2 to patch the security issue
🔗 Analysis chain
Verify package version compatibility and security.
The test packages are well-chosen and cover all essential testing needs. Let's verify the versions for compatibility and security.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for latest versions and security advisories for test packages
# Check NuGet for latest versions and potential conflicts
packages=(
"coverlet.collector"
"FluentAssertions"
"Microsoft.AspNetCore.Mvc.Testing"
"Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore.InMemory"
"Microsoft.NET.Test.Sdk"
"Moq"
"xunit"
"xunit.runner.visualstudio"
)
for package in "${packages[@]}"; do
echo "Checking $package..."
gh api graphql -f query="
{
securityVulnerabilities(first: 5, ecosystem: NUGET, package: \"$package\") {
nodes {
advisory {
summary
severity
publishedAt
}
vulnerableVersionRange
firstPatchedVersion {
identifier
}
}
}
}"
done
Length of output: 4609
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
.github/workflows/dotnet.yml(1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (1)
.github/workflows/dotnet.yml (1)
27-28: LGTM! Test step is correctly configured.
The test step is properly positioned after the build step and uses appropriate flags.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (3)
.github/workflows/dotnet.yml(1 hunks).runsettings(1 hunks)devs-who-run-test/MemberTest.cs(1 hunks)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)
- .runsettings
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
- devs-who-run-test/MemberTest.cs
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 actionlint (1.7.4)
.github/workflows/dotnet.yml
35-35: the runner of "actions/upload-artifact@v3" action is too old to run on GitHub Actions. update the action's version to fix this issue
(action)
🪛 yamllint (1.35.1)
.github/workflows/dotnet.yml
[error] 41-41: no new line character at the end of file
(new-line-at-end-of-file)
.github/workflows/dotnet.yml
Outdated
| - name: Publish Test Results | ||
| uses: actions/upload-artifact@v3 | ||
| if: success() || failure() | ||
| with: | ||
| name: test-results | ||
| path: | | ||
| **/*.trx | ||
| **/TestResults/**/coverage.cobertura.xml |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Update action version and fix formatting issues
Several improvements are needed in the test results publishing configuration:
- The
upload-artifactaction should be updated to v4 for better compatibility - The path indentation is inconsistent
- The file should end with a newline
Apply these fixes:
- name: Publish Test Results
- uses: actions/upload-artifact@v3
+ uses: actions/upload-artifact@v4
if: success() || failure()
with:
name: test-results
path: |
**/*.trx
- **/TestResults/**/coverage.cobertura.xml
+ **/TestResults/**/coverage.cobertura.xml
+📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| - name: Publish Test Results | |
| uses: actions/upload-artifact@v3 | |
| if: success() || failure() | |
| with: | |
| name: test-results | |
| path: | | |
| **/*.trx | |
| **/TestResults/**/coverage.cobertura.xml | |
| - name: Publish Test Results | |
| uses: actions/upload-artifact@v4 | |
| if: success() || failure() | |
| with: | |
| name: test-results | |
| path: | | |
| **/*.trx | |
| **/TestResults/**/coverage.cobertura.xml | |
🧰 Tools
🪛 actionlint (1.7.4)
35-35: the runner of "actions/upload-artifact@v3" action is too old to run on GitHub Actions. update the action's version to fix this issue
(action)
🪛 yamllint (1.35.1)
[error] 41-41: no new line character at the end of file
(new-line-at-end-of-file)
.github/workflows/dotnet.yml
Outdated
| - name: Run Test | ||
| run: | | ||
| dotnet test --no-build --verbosity normal \ | ||
| --logger "trx;LogFileName=test-results.trx" \ | ||
| --collect:"XPlat Code Coverage" \ | ||
| --settings .runsettings \ | ||
| -- RunConfiguration.MaxCpuCount=1 TestRunParameters.Retry=3 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Fix MSBuild parameter syntax in test command
There's a syntax error in the MSBuild parameters. The space between -- and the parameter name will cause the command to fail.
Apply this fix:
- name: Run Test
run: |
dotnet test --no-build --verbosity normal \
--logger "trx;LogFileName=test-results.trx" \
--collect:"XPlat Code Coverage" \
--settings .runsettings \
- -- RunConfiguration.MaxCpuCount=1 TestRunParameters.Retry=3
+ --RunConfiguration.MaxCpuCount=1 --TestRunParameters.Retry=3📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| - name: Run Test | |
| run: | | |
| dotnet test --no-build --verbosity normal \ | |
| --logger "trx;LogFileName=test-results.trx" \ | |
| --collect:"XPlat Code Coverage" \ | |
| --settings .runsettings \ | |
| -- RunConfiguration.MaxCpuCount=1 TestRunParameters.Retry=3 | |
| - name: Run Test | |
| run: | | |
| dotnet test --no-build --verbosity normal \ | |
| --logger "trx;LogFileName=test-results.trx" \ | |
| --collect:"XPlat Code Coverage" \ | |
| --settings .runsettings \ | |
| --RunConfiguration.MaxCpuCount=1 --TestRunParameters.Retry=3 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
.github/workflows/dotnet.yml(1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 actionlint (1.7.4)
.github/workflows/dotnet.yml
35-35: the runner of "actions/upload-artifact@v3" action is too old to run on GitHub Actions. update the action's version to fix this issue
(action)
🪛 yamllint (1.35.1)
.github/workflows/dotnet.yml
[error] 41-41: no new line character at the end of file
(new-line-at-end-of-file)
🔇 Additional comments (1)
.github/workflows/dotnet.yml (1)
34-41: Update action version and fix formatting issues
The test results publishing configuration needs several improvements:
- Update
upload-artifactaction to v4 - Fix path indentation
- Add newline at end of file
Apply this fix:
- name: Publish Test Results
- uses: actions/upload-artifact@v3
+ uses: actions/upload-artifact@v4
if: success() || failure()
with:
name: test-results
path: |
**/*.trx
- **/TestResults/**/coverage.cobertura.xml
+ **/TestResults/**/coverage.cobertura.xml
🧰 Tools
🪛 actionlint (1.7.4)
35-35: the runner of "actions/upload-artifact@v3" action is too old to run on GitHub Actions. update the action's version to fix this issue
(action)
🪛 yamllint (1.35.1)
[error] 41-41: no new line character at the end of file
(new-line-at-end-of-file)
.github/workflows/dotnet.yml
Outdated
| - name: Run Test | ||
| run: | | ||
| dotnet test --no-build --verbosity normal \ | ||
| --logger "trx;LogFileName=test-results.trx" \ | ||
| --collect:"XPlat Code Coverage" \ | ||
| --settings .runsettings \ | ||
| -- RunConfiguration.MaxCpuCount=1 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
Fix command syntax and remove redundant MaxCpuCount parameter
The command line argument -- RunConfiguration.MaxCpuCount=1 is redundant since it's already configured in .runsettings file. The only issue is the syntax error with the extra space after --. Test retry configuration is not needed in the test command as there's no evidence of flaky tests in the test suite - the only retry logic found is for database connections.
Apply this fix:
- name: Run Test
run: |
dotnet test --no-build --verbosity normal \
--logger "trx;LogFileName=test-results.trx" \
--collect:"XPlat Code Coverage" \
--settings .runsettings \
- -- RunConfiguration.MaxCpuCount=1🔗 Analysis chain
Fix command syntax and enhance test configuration
The test command has several issues that need to be addressed:
- The MSBuild parameter syntax is incorrect (
-- RunConfigurationshould not have a space) - Missing test retry configuration for handling flaky tests
- Missing test parallelization settings
Apply this fix:
- name: Run Test
run: |
dotnet test --no-build --verbosity normal \
--logger "trx;LogFileName=test-results.trx" \
--collect:"XPlat Code Coverage" \
--settings .runsettings \
- -- RunConfiguration.MaxCpuCount=1
+ --RunConfiguration.MaxCpuCount=0 \
+ --TestRunParameters.Retry=3Let's verify the existence of the required .runsettings file:
MaxCpuCount is already configured in .runsettings file
The review comment's suggestion to modify MaxCpuCount is incorrect as this setting is already properly configured in the .runsettings file. The current command line argument -- RunConfiguration.MaxCpuCount=1 matches the configuration in .runsettings, though it has a syntax error with the extra space after --.
Let's verify if there are any test retry configurations or known flaky tests in the codebase:
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check if .runsettings file exists and contains required configuration
if [ -f ".runsettings" ]; then
echo "Found .runsettings file"
cat .runsettings
else
echo ".runsettings file is missing"
fi
Length of output: 695
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for test retry attributes or flaky test markers
rg -i "flaky|retry" --type cs -C 2
# Search for test configuration files
fd -e json -e config -e xml -e props | grep -i "test" | xargs cat
Length of output: 1061
Co-authored-by: coderabbitai[bot] <136622811+coderabbitai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (2)
devs-who-run-test/MemberTest.cs (2)
18-21: Improve test data organization and coverageConsider the following improvements to the test data:
- Extract test data to constants or helper methods
- Focus test data on relevant properties (UserType and Email are sufficient for this test)
- Add negative test cases
Here's a suggested refactor:
+ private static class TestData + { + public static readonly Member MeetupMember = new() + { + Id = 1, + UserType = UserType.Meetup, + Email = "meetup1@test.com" + }; + + public static readonly Member ConfMember = new() + { + Id = 2, + UserType = UserType.Conf, + Email = "conf1@test.com" + }; + } + [Fact] public async Task GetMembers_WhenFilteredByMeetupType_ShouldReturnOnlyMeetupMembers() { // ... context setup ... context.Members.AddRange( - new Member { Id = 1, UserType = UserType.Meetup, Email = "meetup1@test.com", FirstName = "This is", LastName = "Learning", GitHubUserName = "@thisislearning" }, - new Member { Id = 2, UserType = UserType.Conf, Email = "conf1@test.com", FirstName = "This is Learning", LastName = "Conf", GitHubUserName = "@thisislearning" } + TestData.MeetupMember, + TestData.ConfMember );Would you like me to help generate additional test cases for:
- Empty database scenario
- Multiple meetup members scenario
- No meetup members scenario
24-30: Add descriptive comments for test sectionsThe test follows the Arrange-Act-Assert pattern, but only the "Act" section is commented. Consider adding comments for all sections for consistency.
+ // Arrange var options = new DbContextOptionsBuilder<DevsWhoRunDbContext>() .UseInMemoryDatabase(databaseName: "TestDatabase") .Options; // ... setup code ... // Act var meetups = await context.Members.Where(m => m.UserType == UserType.Meetup).ToListAsync(); // Assert meetups.Should().NotBeNull();
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
.github/workflows/dotnet.yml(1 hunks)devs-who-run-test/MemberTest.cs(1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 yamllint (1.35.1)
.github/workflows/dotnet.yml
[error] 41-41: no new line character at the end of file
(new-line-at-end-of-file)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
.github/workflows/dotnet.yml (2)
27-33:
Fix command syntax and remove redundant MaxCpuCount parameter
The MSBuild parameter syntax has an error, and the MaxCpuCount parameter is redundant since it's configured in .runsettings.
Apply this fix:
- name: Run Test
run: |
dotnet test --no-build --verbosity normal \
--logger "trx;LogFileName=test-results.trx" \
--collect:"XPlat Code Coverage" \
--settings .runsettings \
- -- RunConfiguration.MaxCpuCount=134-41:
Fix artifact path formatting and add newline
The artifact path indentation is inconsistent, and the file is missing a newline at the end.
Apply these fixes:
- name: Publish Test Results
uses: actions/upload-artifact@v4
if: success() || failure()
with:
name: test-results
path: |
**/*.trx
- **/TestResults/**/coverage.cobertura.xml
+ **/TestResults/**/coverage.cobertura.xml
+Likely invalid or redundant comment.
🧰 Tools
🪛 yamllint (1.35.1)
[error] 41-41: no new line character at the end of file
(new-line-at-end-of-file)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
.github/workflows/dotnet.yml (1)
33-40: Fix formatting issues in test results publishing configuration.The path configuration has inconsistent indentation and the file is missing a newline at the end.
Apply these fixes:
- name: Publish Test Results uses: actions/upload-artifact@v4 if: success() || failure() with: name: test-results path: | **/*.trx - **/TestResults/**/coverage.cobertura.xml + **/TestResults/**/coverage.cobertura.xml +🧰 Tools
🪛 yamllint (1.35.1)
[error] 40-40: no new line character at the end of file
(new-line-at-end-of-file)
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
.github/workflows/dotnet.yml(1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 yamllint (1.35.1)
.github/workflows/dotnet.yml
[error] 40-40: no new line character at the end of file
(new-line-at-end-of-file)
🔇 Additional comments (1)
.github/workflows/dotnet.yml (1)
27-32: Verify .runsettings file existence and enhance test configuration.
The test command references a .runsettings file but we should verify its existence and configuration.
Consider adding test parallelization for faster builds:
- name: Run Test
run: |
dotnet test --no-build --verbosity normal \
--logger "trx;LogFileName=test-results.trx" \
--collect:"XPlat Code Coverage" \
--settings .runsettings \
+ --maxcpucount:0
This pull request includes several changes to the
devs-who-run-apiproject, focusing on cleaning up configuration files and updating the project file. The most important changes include the removal of the.gitignorefile, the deletion of commented-out code in theDevsWhoRunDbContextclass, and the update to the project file to reflect the removal of.gitignore.Configuration cleanup:
devs-who-run-api/.gitignore: Removed the entire.gitignorefile, which included various patterns for ignoring files generated by different development environments and build processes.Code cleanup:
devs-who-run-api/DevsWhoRunDBContext.cs: Deleted commented-out code in theDevsWhoRunDbContextclass that was previously used for configuring the database connection string.Project file update:
devs-who-run-api/devs-who-run-api.csproj: Updated the project file to remove the.gitignorefile from the project.This pull request includes several changes to the
devs-who-run-apiproject, focusing on cleaning up configuration files and removing unused code. The most important changes include the removal of the.gitignorefile, commented-out code in theDevsWhoRunDbContextclass, and updating the project file to reflect these deletions.Configuration cleanup:
devs-who-run-api/.gitignore: Removed the.gitignorefile which contained various file and directory exclusions.Code cleanup:
devs-who-run-api/DevsWhoRunDBContext.cs: Removed commented-out code in theDevsWhoRunDbContextclass that was related to configuring the database connection.Project file update:
devs-who-run-api/devs-who-run-api.csproj: Updated the project file to remove the.gitignorefile from the project.Summary by CodeRabbit
MembersModuleroute definitions.Membermodule, ensuring accurate retrieval of member data..gitignorefile to exclude various temporary and user-specific files, enhancing repository cleanliness..runsettingsfile for configuring test execution and data collection.