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

Correct type names for registry contract tests #1456

Closed
ruspl-afed opened this issue Nov 12, 2024 · 0 comments · Fixed by #1457
Closed

Correct type names for registry contract tests #1456

ruspl-afed opened this issue Nov 12, 2024 · 0 comments · Fixed by #1457
Assignees
Milestone

Comments

@ruspl-afed
Copy link
Contributor

Somehow we managed to spread misprint in a test type name and now have tests named like *ServicesRegitryTest in org.eclipse.passage.lic.api.tests package

Since we publish LIC API contract tests to be implemented by extenders, major version is a good opportunity to fix this misprint: Regitry -> Registry

@ruspl-afed ruspl-afed added this to the 4.0.0 milestone Nov 12, 2024
@ruspl-afed ruspl-afed self-assigned this Nov 12, 2024
ruspl-afed added a commit that referenced this issue Nov 12, 2024
`ConditionMiningServicesRegitryTest` ->
`ConditionMiningServicesRegistryTest`
ruspl-afed added a commit that referenced this issue Nov 12, 2024
`ConditionTransportServicesRegitryTest` ->
`ConditionTransportServicesRegistryTest`
ruspl-afed added a commit that referenced this issue Nov 13, 2024
`ExpressionEvaluationServicesRegitryTest` ->
`ExpressionEvaluationServicesRegistryTest`
ruspl-afed added a commit that referenced this issue Nov 13, 2024
`ExpressionEvaluationServicesRegitryTest` ->
`ExpressionEvaluationServicesRegistryTest`
ruspl-afed added a commit that referenced this issue Nov 13, 2024
`ExpressionParsingServicesRegitryTest` ->
`ExpressionParsingServicesRegistryTest`
ruspl-afed added a commit that referenced this issue Nov 13, 2024
`ExpressionTokenAssessmentServicesRegitryTest` ->
`ExpressionTokenAssessmentServicesRegistryTest`
ruspl-afed added a commit that referenced this issue Nov 13, 2024
`KeyKeepersRegitryTest` ->
`KeyKeepersRegistryTest`
ruspl-afed added a commit that referenced this issue Nov 13, 2024
`KeyKeepersRegitryTest` ->
`KeyKeepersRegistryTest`
ruspl-afed added a commit that referenced this issue Nov 13, 2024
`RequirementResolutionServicesRegitryTest` ->
`RequirementResolutionServicesRegistryTest`
ruspl-afed added a commit that referenced this issue Nov 13, 2024
`RuntimeEnvironmentRegitryTest` ->
`RuntimeEnvironmentRegistryTest`
ruspl-afed added a commit that referenced this issue Nov 13, 2024
`StreamCodecsRegitryTest` ->
`StreamCodecsRegistryTest`
zelenyhleb pushed a commit that referenced this issue Nov 13, 2024
* [#1456] Correct type names for registry contract tests

`ConditionMiningServicesRegitryTest` ->
`ConditionMiningServicesRegistryTest`

* [#1456] Correct type names for registry contract tests

`ConditionTransportServicesRegitryTest` ->
`ConditionTransportServicesRegistryTest`

* [#1456] Correct type names for registry contract tests

`ExpressionEvaluationServicesRegitryTest` ->
`ExpressionEvaluationServicesRegistryTest`

* [#1456] Correct type names for registry contract tests

`ExpressionParsingServicesRegitryTest` ->
`ExpressionParsingServicesRegistryTest`

* [#1456] Correct type names for registry contract tests

`ExpressionTokenAssessmentServicesRegitryTest` ->
`ExpressionTokenAssessmentServicesRegistryTest`

* [#1456] Correct type names for registry contract tests

`KeyKeepersRegitryTest` ->
`KeyKeepersRegistryTest`

* [#1456] Correct type names for registry contract tests

`KeyKeepersRegitryTest` ->
`KeyKeepersRegistryTest`

* [#1456] Correct type names for registry contract tests

`RequirementResolutionServicesRegitryTest` ->
`RequirementResolutionServicesRegistryTest`

* [#1456] Correct type names for registry contract tests

`RuntimeEnvironmentRegitryTest` ->
`RuntimeEnvironmentRegistryTest`

* [#1456] Correct type names for registry contract tests

`StreamCodecsRegitryTest` ->
`StreamCodecsRegistryTest`
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

1 participant