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

Assert codes instead of text when using NeoFS CLI tools #919

Open
cthulhu-rider opened this issue Dec 25, 2024 · 0 comments
Open

Assert codes instead of text when using NeoFS CLI tools #919

cthulhu-rider opened this issue Dec 25, 2024 · 0 comments
Labels
enhancement Improving existing functionality I4 No visible changes S2 Regular significance U4 Nothing urgent

Comments

@cthulhu-rider
Copy link
Contributor

cthulhu-rider commented Dec 25, 2024

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.

tests dealing with NeoFS via CLI expect particular text sometimes. For example, recently i accidentally changed neofs-cli container get output from container not found to not found, and corresponding test FAIL

this seems good in terms of testing for changes in behavior, and in this particular case. But globally I thought that strict text checking is not always convenient: any improvement of the text makes the test FAIL. For example, if command output will be changed to Container not found - test will FAIL. I wanna two things at the same time:

  1. do not recv FAIL on test if only text output has been changed
  2. still get a behavior change report from the test

Describe the solution you'd like

  1. check resulting codes instead. There are two of them available: NeoFS status and exit code. Checking the NeoFS code would still be a text check, but:
  • rest of the cmd output can be changed freely
  • code correctness is more important than debug message (do we check codes btw? @evgeniiz321)

NeoFS status codes are also mapped into CLI exit ones one way or another. We can develop this behavior reduce text checks even more

  1. report about text change in warning. As i can see, they are available in current toolchain === 95 passed, 1 warning in 2239.92s (0:37:19) ===
@cthulhu-rider cthulhu-rider added the enhancement Improving existing functionality label Dec 25, 2024
@roman-khimov roman-khimov added U4 Nothing urgent S2 Regular significance I4 No visible changes labels Dec 25, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement Improving existing functionality I4 No visible changes S2 Regular significance U4 Nothing urgent
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants