[WIP] Add test coverage

[shashikala1998]

Why is this change needed?

To add test coverages for;

1. spp_custom_field
2. spp_attendance
3. spp_cycle_attendance_compliance

How was the change implemented?

New unit tests

Unit tests executed by the author

How to test manually

Related links

#779

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 96.34703% with 16 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 76.85%. Comparing base (60c70be) to head (abb57fd).
Report is 52 commits behind head on 17.0.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...endance_compliance/tests/test_attendance_config.py	89.18%	8 Missing ⚠️
...pp_attendance/tests/test_attendance_controllers.py	91.17%	6 Missing ⚠️
spp_custom_field/tests/test_custom_field.py	98.37%	1 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             17.0     #782      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   75.02%   76.85%   +1.82%     
==========================================
  Files         727      775      +48     
  Lines       19228    20656    +1428     
  Branches     2400     2521     +121     
==========================================
+ Hits        14426    15875    +1449     
+ Misses       4293     4211      -82     
- Partials      509      570      +61     

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[gonzalesedwin1123]

@shashikala1998 there are no codes in spp_cycle_attendance_compliance test codes. Please check.

[kneckinator]

@gonzalesedwin1123 can you please take a look at the latest changes from @shashikala1998 ?
Thanks!

[gonzalesedwin1123]

Yes @kneckinator . I will check this today.

[kneckinator]

Yes @kneckinator . I will check this today.

Great @gonzalesedwin1123 . Did you find anything or can this be merged?

[gonzalesedwin1123]

Yes @kneckinator . I will check this today.

Great @gonzalesedwin1123 . Did you find anything or can this be merged?

@kneckinator I just requested for changes from @shashikala1998 regarding the sonarqubecloud report.

[gonzalesedwin1123]

Quality Gate failed

Failed conditions 24 Security Hotspots 7.2% Duplication on New Code (required ≤ 3%)

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

@shashikala1998 can you fix these. I think this is important.

[gonzalesedwin1123]

@shashikala1998 please check the sonarqubecloud report and make the necessary fixes. Thanks.

[kneckinator]

@shashikala1998 please check the sonarqubecloud report and make the necessary fixes. Thanks.

@shashikala1998 there are two main topics:

• The duplicated lines in the tests; for instance, create a parametrised function to generate a attendance record in spp_cycle_attendance_compliance/tests/test_cycle_attendance.py
• Use https in the event_data_source in the tests, to avoid false positives from the scan performed by SonarCloud

You should also change test.com to use either example.com, or any domain in the TLD .example. RFC 2606 has reserved this TLD for testing, so you can for instance use https://test.example instead of http://test.com

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
1 New issue
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
2.8% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

[shashikala1998]

@gonzalesedwin1123 @kneckinator sonarqubecloud reports issues are fixed and Quality gate passed

[kneckinator]

@gonzalesedwin1123 @kneckinator sonarqubecloud reports issues are fixed and Quality gate passed

Thanks @shashikala1998 . Can you please take a final look @gonzalesedwin1123 ?