Skip to content
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

Provide meaningful unit tests for store.ts #1323

Closed
samayer12 opened this issue Oct 23, 2024 · 0 comments · Fixed by #1819
Closed

Provide meaningful unit tests for store.ts #1323

samayer12 opened this issue Oct 23, 2024 · 0 comments · Fixed by #1819
Assignees
Milestone

Comments

@samayer12
Copy link
Contributor

samayer12 commented Oct 23, 2024

Describe what should be investigated or refactored

store.ts on exposes a constructor and generally suffers from poor test-coverage. There are several instances of branching logic in that file that need test coverage.

Create some unit tests that execute some of the varying paths through store.ts and make meaningful assertions to aid someone who is digging into future issues with a Journey or E2E test. We'll know we're "done" with this when CodeCov reports a better coverage (say, 60% or greater?) percentage and the corresponding unit tests make meaningful assertions.

Links to any relevant code

Reference the existing skipped tests in store.test.ts (introduced by #1259) for a starting point.

Additional context

@cmwylie19 cmwylie19 added this to the v0.45.1 milestone Feb 3, 2025
@cmwylie19 cmwylie19 moved this from 🆕 New to 📋 Backlog in Pepr Project Board Feb 3, 2025
@cmwylie19 cmwylie19 moved this from 📋 Backlog to 🏗 In progress in Pepr Project Board Feb 12, 2025
@cmwylie19 cmwylie19 self-assigned this Feb 12, 2025
@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this from 🏗 In progress to ✅ Done in Pepr Project Board Feb 14, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
Status: ✅ Done
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants