https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=38924 Victor Grousset/tuxayo <victor@tuxayo.net> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|Signed Off |Failed QA --- Comment #264 from Victor Grousset/tuxayo <victor@tuxayo.net> --- There is a divergence between an upgraded install and a fresh one: AllowQuotaOverride and UseGuarantorQuota have a column at NULL or '' depending on upgraded vs fresh. Also a version has two columns swapped putting values in the wrong place. UseGuarantorQuota has divergences in the values of the explanation. ---- When looking at the test coverage as described here: https://wiki.koha-community.org/wiki/Coding_Guidelines#PERL17:_Unit_tests_ar... The findings are that no changes in C4/Circulation.pm are covered. The relevant tests to run are these, right? t/Koha/Auth/Permissions.t t/db_dependent/Koha/Patron/Quotas.t t/db_dependent/api/v1/patrons_quotas.t (the tests files touched by the patches) Changes in Koha/Old/Checkout.pm also aren't covered either. At first I wasn't sure if that was relevant. But that looks useful to check that the quotas are actually updated and not just having a deletion somewhere that runs the code and just shows that it doesn't explode. (I suppose the full test suite would delete a checkout and I would have seen that as covered) In Koha/Patron.pm, all_quotas() look relevant to test also. --- (In reply to Jacob O'Mara from comment #170)
Test plan is hidden in the ~200 comments so posting at the bottom as well for easier finding!
Don't worry, the trick is to go to the attachment section of the bug. Look for the 1st patch. Click on the date => immediate jump to the comment of that patch which is usually the one with the test plan. The re-posting of the test plan was immediately buried anyway :P (twice !) ---- (In reply to Jacob O'Mara from comment #200)
This has been on one of our Customer's sites for around a year at this point with no issues, going to call that an implicit sign off that it works as expected. Added sign-off line and moved to needs QA
Thanks Sally for the explicit signoff. I was going to ask Jacob that someone proofreads the test plan and confirms that their usage fully covers it. It's like my mind got read <.< ----- For next revision of the test plan: it needs a mention of `yarn api:bundle` to apply the API changes. (assuming that's the clean way to do that) ---- Did the sandbox remove the test plan between comment 201 and comment 232 ? 😱 That shouldn't be possible even if wanting to. Did I miss something? So I can report the issue if someone confirms it look legit. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.