Added issue template for test issues #2917
Conversation
|
Caution Review failedThe pull request is closed. WalkthroughA new GitHub issue template named "Test Implementation Request" has been added to the repository's Changes
Assessment against linked issues
Poem
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: .coderabbit.yaml 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
Documentation and Community
|
Our Pull Request Approval ProcessThanks for contributing! Testing Your CodeRemember, your PRs won't be reviewed until these criteria are met:
Our policies make our code better. ReviewersDo not assign reviewers. Our Queue Monitors will review your PR and assign them.
Reviewing Your CodeYour reviewer(s) will have the following roles:
CONTRIBUTING.mdRead our CONTRIBUTING.md file. Most importantly:
Other
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Nitpick comments (5)
.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/test.md (5)
1-7: Consider a more specific title format.The current title format
"Test: [File Name]"could be more descriptive. Consider using a format that includes the type of test and module/component name:-title: "Test: [File Name]" +title: "Test: [Module/Component] - [File Name] - [Type of Test]"This format will help with organization and make it easier to search for specific test issues.
8-9: Make the example file path more distinguishable.The example file path could be more clearly marked to prevent confusion.
-The goal of this issue is to improve the code coverage for the file: `Example: src/resolvers/Chat/messages.ts` +The goal of this issue is to improve the code coverage for the file: +> Example: `src/resolvers/Chat/messages.ts`
10-13: Enhance task details with testing strategies.Consider adding more specific guidance about testing approaches.
# Tasks 1. Review the file to identify sections of code that are being ignored by Codecov or are not covered by tests. 2. Create or update test cases to ensure 100% coverage for the file. 3. Remove any `/* istanbul ignore */` or equivalent statements that bypass code coverage reporting, unless absolutely necessary. +4. Consider the following testing strategies: + - Unit tests for individual functions/methods + - Integration tests for complex workflows + - Edge cases and error conditions + - Mocking external dependencies
17-20: Consider additional quality criteria.The acceptance criteria could include more quality-focused items.
# Acceptance Criteria - All sections of the file are covered by tests. - Code coverage for the file reaches 100%. - PR created with necessary updates, passing all checks and reviews. +- Tests follow established naming conventions and patterns +- Test descriptions clearly explain the test scenarios +- Tests are efficient and don't include unnecessary assertions +- Complex test scenarios are documented with comments
21-23: Format the URL as a proper Markdown link.The bare URL should be formatted as a Markdown link for better readability and to comply with Markdown best practices.
**Potential internship candidates** Please read this if you are planning to apply for a Palisadoes Foundation internship -https://github.com/PalisadoesFoundation/talawa/issues/359 +[Internship Information](https://github.com/PalisadoesFoundation/talawa/issues/359)🧰 Tools
🪛 Markdownlint (0.37.0)
23-23: Bare URL used
null(MD034, no-bare-urls)
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/test.md(1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 Markdownlint (0.37.0)
.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/test.md
23-23: Bare URL used
null
(MD034, no-bare-urls)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (1)
- GitHub Check: Testing Application (22.x)
|
@palisadoes I have added the template for testing issues mentioning the code coverage report and the template you mentioned. Please review it. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Nitpick comments (5)
.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/test.md (5)
1-7: Enhance the template metadata for better clarity.Consider the following improvements to make the template more user-friendly:
--- name: Test Implementation Request -about: Write tests for an existing file in the project +about: Request to implement missing tests or improve test coverage for existing code -title: "Test: [File Name]" +title: "Test: [Directory/File Name] - [Brief Description]" labels: testing assignees: "" ---
8-9: Enhance the goal section with more context.Consider adding more structure to help users provide complete information:
# Goal -The goal of this issue is to improve the code coverage for the file: `Example: src/resolvers/Chat/messages.ts` +The goal of this issue is to improve the code coverage for the file: +- **File Path**: `[e.g., src/resolvers/Query/users.ts]` +- **Current Coverage**: [X]% +- **Target Coverage**: 100%
10-13: Expand tasks to include documentation and best practices.Consider adding more detailed tasks to ensure comprehensive test implementation:
# Tasks 1. Review the file to identify sections of code that are being ignored by Codecov or are not covered by tests. 2. Create or update test cases to ensure 100% coverage for the file. 3. Remove any `/* istanbul ignore */` or equivalent statements that bypass code coverage reporting, unless absolutely necessary. +4. Document any test cases that cover edge cases or complex scenarios. +5. Follow the project's testing patterns and use appropriate testing utilities/helpers. +6. Update relevant documentation if new testing patterns or utilities are introduced.
14-16: Add more specific testing resources.Consider expanding the resources section with more specific links and tools:
# Resources -Refer to the foundational documentation on writing test cases in the repository. +- [Testing Guide](../docs/TESTING.md) +- [Test Examples](../tests/README.md) +- [Jest Documentation](https://jestjs.io/docs/getting-started) - Check the [Codecov report](https://app.codecov.io/gh/PalisadoesFoundation/talawa-api/) for details on the uncovered lines. +- Use the project's testing utilities at `tests/helpers/`
17-20: Expand acceptance criteria for quality assurance.Consider adding more specific criteria to ensure high-quality test implementations:
# Acceptance Criteria - All sections of the file are covered by tests. - Code coverage for the file reaches 100%. - PR created with necessary updates, passing all checks and reviews. +- Test cases include both positive and negative scenarios. +- No test cases are skipped without valid justification. +- Test descriptions clearly explain the test scenarios. +- Complex test cases are documented with comments.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/test.md(1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 Markdownlint (0.37.0)
.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/test.md
23-23: Bare URL used
null
(MD034, no-bare-urls)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (2)
- GitHub Check: Testing Application (22.x)
- GitHub Check: Analyse Code With CodeQL (typescript)
|
palisadoes
added
the
ignore-sensitive-files-pr
palisadoes
merged commit 6a5a257
into
PalisadoesFoundation:develop
|
@palisadoes I think we need that in |
|
Please add it there |
|
@palisadoes added it here in a pull : #2919 |
What kind of change does this PR introduce?
feature
Issue Number:
Fixes #2915
Snapshots/Videos:
If relevant, did you update the documentation?
Not sure
Summary
Does this PR introduce a breaking change?
Adds issue template for test
Checklist
CodeRabbit AI Review
Test Coverage
Other information
Have you read the contributing guide?
Yes
Summary by CodeRabbit