action #176862
open
Added by okurz 19 days ago.
Updated about 20 hours ago.
Category:
Feature requests
Description
Motivation¶
Like #176475 but for openQA
Acceptance criteria¶
- AC1: Automatic checks prevent the use of Try::Tiny in openQA
- AC2: All basic
eval { … }; if ($@) …
is replaced by try { … } catch ($e) { }
in openQA
- AC3:: Test::Fatal is not used, and Test::Exception is only used implicitly
Suggestions¶
- Copied from action #176475: Use Feature::Compat::Try in our code - os-autoinst size:S added
- Description updated (diff)
- Status changed from Blocked to New
- Description updated (diff)
- Assignee deleted (
okurz)
- Target version changed from Tools - Next to Ready
- Subject changed from Use Feature::Compat::Try in our code - openQA to [beginner][easy] Use Feature::Compat::Try in our code - openQA
- Priority changed from Normal to Low
- Status changed from New to In Progress
- Assignee set to ybonatakis
- Subject changed from [beginner][easy] Use Feature::Compat::Try in our code - openQA to [beginner][easy] Use Feature::Compat::Try in our code - openQA size:S
- Description updated (diff)
- Subject changed from [beginner][easy] Use Feature::Compat::Try in our code - openQA size:S to [beginner][easy] Use Feature::Compat::Try in our code - openQA
- Description updated (diff)
- Subject changed from [beginner][easy] Use Feature::Compat::Try in our code - openQA to [beginner][easy] Use Feature::Compat::Try in our code - openQA size:S
- Description updated (diff)
@ybonatakis please be more careful with ticket updates. I recovered the deleted AC3 and subject addition
- Assignee changed from ybonatakis to tinita
- Assignee changed from tinita to ybonatakis
I did refactor the lib/OpenQA/WebAPI/Controller/API/V1/JobTemplate.pm and tests worked. but I am not sure I have the best solution.
I will think a bit about it before submit.
ybonatakis wrote in #note-19:
Oli it would be nice to mention https://github.com/os-autoinst/openQA/pull/6214 here as this one is still in progress.
sure, it's related. I mentioned the relation in github PRs as well as in meetings. So how about those separate PRs we discussed for the files you saw problematic so that we can offer specific help for each?
Also available in: Atom
PDF