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

[DOJOT-75] [DOJOT-76] Feature - Unique Labels #201

Merged

Conversation

LuanEdCosta
Copy link
Member

@LuanEdCosta LuanEdCosta commented Aug 12, 2022

  • Please check if the PR fulfills these requirements
  • Tests for the changes have been added (for bug fixes / features)
  • Docs have been added / updated (for bug fixes / features)
  • What kind of change does this PR introduce? (Bug fix, feature, docs update, ...)
    Feature

  • What is the current behavior? (You can also link to an open issue here)
    You can create multiple devices and templates with the same label

  • What is the new behavior (if this is a feature change)?
    Now the label of devices and templates are unique.

  • Does this PR introduce a breaking change? (What changes might users need to make in their application due to this PR?)
    Yes.

  1. Delete or rename all devices and templates with repeated labels
  2. Apply new migrations on existing databases

@LuanEdCosta
Copy link
Member Author

The CI stuck and I don't know why.
I think I need some help here to run the CI or to run tests locally to check if everything is fine.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Aug 19, 2022

Codecov Report

Merging #201 (d7436a2) into development (7fb82f3) will increase coverage by 0.50%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

@@               Coverage Diff               @@
##           development     #201      +/-   ##
===============================================
+ Coverage        82.48%   82.99%   +0.50%     
===============================================
  Files               28       28              
  Lines             2490     2529      +39     
===============================================
+ Hits              2054     2099      +45     
+ Misses             436      430       -6     
Flag Coverage Δ
Device-manager 82.99% <100.00%> (+0.50%) ⬆️

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

Impacted Files Coverage Δ
DeviceManager/DatabaseModels.py 86.27% <100.00%> (+0.98%) ⬆️
DeviceManager/TemplateHandler.py 63.98% <100.00%> (+0.96%) ⬆️
tests/test_device_handler.py 99.71% <100.00%> (+0.01%) ⬆️
tests/test_template_handler.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
DeviceManager/DeviceHandler.py 65.50% <0.00%> (+0.31%) ⬆️

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

Copy link
Contributor

@rodrigoaasm rodrigoaasm left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Insufficient unit test coverage.

Copy link
Contributor

@rodrigoaasm rodrigoaasm left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ok

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

4 participants