Skip to content

drop verification-service option & use DefaultTransport instead #505

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

Conversation

MatousJobanek
Copy link
Contributor

@MatousJobanek MatousJobanek commented Feb 10, 2025

when the DefaultTransport is used, then there is no need to mock the HTTP Client to make gock working, thus we can simplify the tests and the other related code.
KUBESAW-260

Copy link

Comment on lines -91 to -99
// default function to return an instance of Verification service
f.verificationServiceFunc = func(_ ...verificationservice.VerificationServiceOption) service.VerificationService {
return verificationservice.NewVerificationService(f.getContext(), f.verificationServiceOptions...)
}

f.signupServiceFunc = func(_ ...signupservice.SignupServiceOption) service.SignupService {
return signupservice.NewSignupService(f.getContext().Client(), f.signupServiceOptions...)
}

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

this was the only place where verificationServiceFunc and signupServiceFunc were used. Also making ready for additional cleanup

Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 10, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 85.33%. Comparing base (dfce878) to head (545c84e).
Report is 1 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #505      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   85.34%   85.33%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files          32       32              
  Lines        3118     3116       -2     
==========================================
- Hits         2661     2659       -2     
  Misses        371      371              
  Partials       86       86              
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 85.33% <100.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️

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

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

Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Feb 10, 2025

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: alexeykazakov, MatousJobanek

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
  • OWNERS [MatousJobanek,alexeykazakov]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@MatousJobanek MatousJobanek merged commit bdaeecc into codeready-toolchain:master Feb 11, 2025
11 of 12 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants