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

Bugs in teams plugin #160

Closed
kevo1ution opened this issue Oct 31, 2019 · 3 comments · Fixed by #161
Closed

Bugs in teams plugin #160

kevo1ution opened this issue Oct 31, 2019 · 3 comments · Fixed by #161

Comments

@kevo1ution
Copy link
Collaborator

Error output when changing/adding team permissions:

  • Empty value for parameter 'owner'
  • Empty value for parameter 'team_id'
  • GitHub request: PUT /teams/:team_id/repos/:owner/:repo - 400

I messed around with this setting when I created a dummy organization to test the settings. The field names here are incorrect. id should be team_id and org should be owner. This is outlined in the documentation octokit/rest

I will open a PR to fix this. On a side note, is there a plan to write better coverage test cases with Nock to catch these issues?

@travi
Copy link
Member

travi commented Nov 5, 2019

sorry that there have been so many discrepancies with these. i do really appreciate your help in investigating and resolving them. i do have an open issue specifically for an additional layer of testing that expands the scope to include the use of nock against actual api calls. the current tests stub out octokit/rest which brings the risk of not recognizing breaking changes in that library since they are stubbed in a way that no longer matches reality.

as far as the actual plan goes, i need to find time to get at least one example test in place that follows this approach and get a chance to start to feel out if it should have any further impact on the overall testing strategy. its hard for me to make promises on timeline, though, since this is volunteer effort and i'm balancing against other obligations (including sickness going through our family currently). this is high on my list though, so i do hope to make progress soon.

once i have an example test in place, would you be interested in contributing additional test coverage?

@travi travi closed this as completed in #161 Nov 5, 2019
@kevo1ution
Copy link
Collaborator Author

kevo1ution commented Nov 5, 2019

@travi Yes I would like to help out

@travi
Copy link
Member

travi commented Nov 5, 2019

great, thank you again. i'll be sure to keep you informed once i get a chance to make progress there, but also be sure to follow #145, if you aren't already

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 a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants