test: Fix test_unit_routers.py

[SahilJat]

Thanks for submitting a PR! Please check the boxes below:

• [ x ] I have read the Contributing Guide.
• [ x ] I have added information to docs/ if required so people know about the feature.
• [ x ] I have filled in the "Changes" section below.
• [ x ] I have filled in the "How did you test this code" section below.

Changes

Closes #7368

Fixes flaky CI failures caused by inline models.Model subclasses in test_unit_app_routers.py polluting Django's apps registry.

• Removed all inline models.Model subclasses (AnalyticsModel, MyModel, MyModel1, MyModel2) from the parametrised test functions.
• Replaced them with mock.MagicMock() objects that expose _meta.app_label — the only attribute the router inspects.
• Removed the from django.db import models import, replaced with from unittest import mock.
• The allow_migrate test was already clean and required no changes.

Root Cause:
The root cause was that defining a Django model class registers it permanently in the apps registry for the lifetime of the worker process. When tests ran with app_label="app_analytics", the four model classes were permanently registered against the real app_analytics app, causing makemigrations --check to find unmigrated models and Migrator teardown to fail with relation "app_analytics_analyticsmodel" already exists across multiple xdist workers.

How did you test this code?

• Ran the updated test file locally and confirmed all 4 tests pass.
• Confirmed the makemigrations test no longer detects phantom models.
• Confirmed migration tests no longer fail with DuplicateTable errors.

[claude]

Claude Code Review

This pull request is from a fork — automated review is disabled. A repository maintainer can comment @claude review to run a one-time review.

[vercel]

@SahilJat is attempting to deploy a commit to the Flagsmith Team on Vercel.

A member of the Team first needs to authorize it.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 98.31%. Comparing base (82c5dfb) to head (6d6282a).
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #7530      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   98.47%   98.31%   -0.16%     
==========================================
  Files        1400     1400              
  Lines       53036    52915     -121     
==========================================
- Hits        52226    52023     -203     
- Misses        810      892      +82     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[khvn26]

The approach looks sensible to me — can you add spec=Model to the mocks you've added?

[SahilJat]

Hii @khvn26 i made the changes and updated the test. Thanks

[khvn26]

@SahilJat Looks like you need to explicitly mock the _meta attribute with spec=Options (see here)

[SahilJat]

Thanks for the hint @khvn26 , did mock the _meta explicitly in this change. Please have a look and let me know if its gtg

[khvn26]

@SahilJat sorry, tiny ask — could you add spec=Options to the new mocks? Thanks

[SahilJat]

@khvn26 no problem, added the spec=Options this time.

[khvn26]

Thanks for the contribution!