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

accept the correct input for executor #1506

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Feb 2, 2024
Merged

accept the correct input for executor #1506

merged 6 commits into from
Feb 2, 2024

Conversation

sunkickr
Copy link
Contributor

Description

Make it so deployment create/update accept the correct executor input

🎟 Issue(s)

Related #XXX

🧪 Functional Testing

List the functional testing steps to confirm this feature or fix.

📸 Screenshots

Add screenshots to illustrate the validity of these changes.

📋 Checklist

  • Rebased from the main (or release if patching) branch (before testing)
  • Ran make test before taking out of draft
  • Ran make lint before taking out of draft
  • Added/updated applicable tests
  • Tested against Astro-API (if necessary).
  • Tested against Houston-API and Astronomer (if necessary).
  • Communicated to/tagged owners of respective clients potentially impacted by these changes.
  • Updated any related documentation

@kushalmalani
Copy link
Contributor

can we add test cases for all types that are accepted. Also, do we need to update the flag description to indicate what is supported?

Can you expand more on your PR description so its clear what is changing for anyone else who do not have proper context

@@ -344,9 +344,10 @@ func Create(name, workspaceID, description, clusterID, runtimeVersion, dagDeploy
requestedCloudProvider = astroplatformcore.CreateStandardDeploymentRequestCloudProviderAZURE
}
var requestedExecutor astroplatformcore.CreateStandardDeploymentRequestExecutor
if executor == CeleryExecutor {
if strings.ToUpper(executor) == strings.ToUpper(CeleryExecutor) || strings.ToUpper(executor) == strings.ToUpper(CELERY) {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

can we add some unit tests for all these cases

Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 2, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: 7 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (3116aba) 85.90% compared to head (fbaf83f) 85.84%.
Report is 8 commits behind head on main.

Files Patch % Lines
cloud/deployment/deployment.go 80.00% 7 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1506      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   85.90%   85.84%   -0.07%     
==========================================
  Files         112      112              
  Lines       14847    14862      +15     
==========================================
+ Hits        12755    12758       +3     
- Misses       1254     1266      +12     
  Partials      838      838              

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

@sunkickr sunkickr merged commit fe7c3fe into main Feb 2, 2024
3 of 5 checks passed
@sunkickr sunkickr deleted the executor-error branch February 2, 2024 19:32
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.

3 participants