Skip to content
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

chore: add required flag for Route name field #2025

Merged
merged 12 commits into from
Aug 4, 2021
Merged

chore: add required flag for Route name field #2025

merged 12 commits into from
Aug 4, 2021

Conversation

okaybase
Copy link
Member

@okaybase okaybase commented Aug 2, 2021

Please answer these questions before submitting a pull request, or your PR will get closed.

Why submit this pull request?

  1. add required flag for Route name field
  2. fix hosts field for FAQ(update host to hosts)

image
image

  • Bugfix
  • New feature provided
  • Improve performance
  • Backport patches

What changes will this PR take into?

Please update this section with detailed description.

Related issues

fix/resolve

Checklist:

  • Did you explain what problem does this PR solve? Or what new features have been added?
  • Have you added corresponding test cases?
  • Have you modified the corresponding document?
  • Is this PR backward compatible? If it is not backward compatible, please discuss on the mailing list first

@netlify
Copy link

netlify bot commented Aug 2, 2021

✔️ Deploy Preview for apisix-dashboard ready!

🔨 Explore the source changes: 6abd22d

🔍 Inspect the deploy log: https://app.netlify.com/sites/apisix-dashboard/deploys/61091030a59fd10007479e20

😎 Browse the preview: https://deploy-preview-2025--apisix-dashboard.netlify.app

@juzhiyuan juzhiyuan changed the title chore: add required flag for service name field chore: add required flag for Route name field Aug 2, 2021
Copy link
Member

@juzhiyuan juzhiyuan left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Changes LGTM, and please add the related test case for your changes.

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Aug 2, 2021

Codecov Report

Merging #2025 (504af7a) into master (6460891) will decrease coverage by 3.89%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #2025      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   67.92%   64.03%   -3.90%     
==========================================
  Files         182      121      -61     
  Lines        6978     3156    -3822     
  Branches      754      753       -1     
==========================================
- Hits         4740     2021    -2719     
+ Misses       1951     1135     -816     
+ Partials      287        0     -287     
Flag Coverage Δ
backend-e2e-test ?
backend-e2e-test-ginkgo ?
backend-unit-test ?
frontend-e2e-test 64.03% <100.00%> (-0.05%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Impacted Files Coverage Δ
web/src/pages/Route/components/Step1/MetaView.tsx 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
web/src/components/RightContent/index.tsx 83.33% <0.00%> (-3.34%) ⬇️
api/internal/handler/tool/tool.go
api/internal/handler/migrate/migrate.go
api/internal/core/store/validate.go
api/cmd/root.go
api/internal/core/store/store.go
api/internal/handler/consumer/consumer.go
api/internal/filter/request_id.go
api/internal/conf/conf.go
... and 53 more

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 6460891...504af7a. Read the comment docs.

@okaybase okaybase requested a review from juzhiyuan August 2, 2021 06:15
@okaybase okaybase requested a review from juzhiyuan August 2, 2021 06:51
@liuxiran
Copy link
Contributor

liuxiran commented Aug 3, 2021

Please add the related test case for your changes, thanks very much~

Hope this will help you to add your test case : https://stackoverflow.com/questions/55516990/cypress-testing-pseudo-css-class-before

@okaybase
Copy link
Member Author

okaybase commented Aug 3, 2021

Please add the related test case for your changes, thanks very much~

Hope this will help you to add your test case : https://stackoverflow.com/questions/55516990/cypress-testing-pseudo-css-class-before

@liuxiran Only document changes are involved this time.

@juzhiyuan
Copy link
Member

@liuxiran Only document changes are involved this time.

And also the required mark.

@liuxiran
Copy link
Contributor

liuxiran commented Aug 3, 2021

@liuxiran Only document changes are involved this time.

And also the required mark.

Yep, need test case for this required mark, even though it is a small improvement, we also want it to be a valid feature. This will also make your pr merged without any worries, thanks

@okaybase
Copy link
Member Author

okaybase commented Aug 3, 2021

@liuxiran Only document changes are involved this time.

And also the required mark.

Yep, need test case for this required mark, even though it is a small improvement, we also want it to be a valid feature. This will also make your pr merged without any worries, thanks

the test case has been added. @juzhiyuan @liuxiran

@liuxiran liuxiran merged commit 26069d4 into apache:master Aug 4, 2021
@liuxiran
Copy link
Contributor

liuxiran commented Aug 4, 2021

the test case has been added. @juzhiyuan @liuxiran

merged, thanks for your contribution~!! @okaybase

@okaybase okaybase deleted the required branch August 4, 2021 06:58
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

6 participants