-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 46
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
Added Unit test case for plans sub commands #304
Conversation
29d5229
to
62e9bcd
Compare
Now that the e2e tests have been moved to a separate workflow, the e2e test files should be moved into the |
1 similar comment
Now that the e2e tests have been moved to a separate workflow, the e2e test files should be moved into the |
62e9bcd
to
3a97056
Compare
3a97056
to
944b0c2
Compare
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.
testing
testing required checks, wasn't a real review
4300ee0
to
a2d0d70
Compare
a2d0d70
to
2cfc8ca
Compare
2cfc8ca
to
6c8ef30
Compare
6c8ef30
to
3a383bf
Compare
3a383bf
to
ec7515e
Compare
ec7515e
to
f60910a
Compare
want: &cobra.Command{}, | ||
cmdFunc: func(t *testing.T, c *cobra.Command) { | ||
root := c.Root() | ||
root.SetArgs([]string{subCommand, "get", "--token", os.Getenv("METAL_AUTH_TOKEN"), "--filter", "type=standard"}) |
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.
What this PR does / why we need it:
This PR was added to unit test cases for plans subcommands.