-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 356
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
fix: Include time when filtering in tracker exporter [DHIS2-16019] #15474
Merged
+517
−52
Merged
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
7 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
b5904d6
fix: Include time when filtering in old tracker exporter [DHIS2-16019]
enricocolasante fd2845a
fix: Include time when filtering in tracker exporter [DHIS2-16019]
enricocolasante df617cb
Add tests
enricocolasante 0eb1a91
Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/master' into DHIS2-16019
enricocolasante 1999d45
Fix code review comments
enricocolasante 8dccabb
Fix code review comments
enricocolasante 74064bc
Fix code review comments
enricocolasante File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I am not following how this date is supposed to test all changes we are applying. Can we make a test where we actually have a date match? Or maybe there is and i do not see it
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We are just testing that the filter on
updatedAt
is working.We try to get all the TE that were updated in the last hour and we want to assert that they are present.
I am not sure we should assert on the date as the next test is doing the opposite and filter on something that will return no TEs and so there we will not have any date to assert
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
ok but i am a bit surprised that we made these changes and there are no tests failing. So maybe there is no test coverage or it is not fine-grained to time. I see many where conditions are changed now so maybe we could think of some test coverage for that. But maybe i am wrong
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, you are right.
There are no failures just because this change is not a breaking one, so any case working before is still working but we need to cover more cases.
I am adding the new test cases for all the changes