Change the assertion for fileset modules #16493
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
In the previous module assertion we were checking the keys manually and if they didn't match we would just output the raw dictionary into the tests. This is not really useful because you have to either inspect them manually or user a local diff to know what exactly changes. This PR use DeepDiff to actually diff the two dictionary together and will output diff of the two dictionnary. This make debugging a little easier.
ph
added
enhancement
in progress
ph
added
[zube]: In Review
review
Team:Platforms
zube
bot
added
[zube]: Inbox
[zube]: In Review
and removed
[zube]: In Review
[zube]: Inbox
labels
zube
bot
added
[zube]: Inbox
[zube]: In Review
and removed
[zube]: Inbox
[zube]: In Review
labels
urso
approved these changes
Feb 24, 2020
|
I will keep it in master, I don't see an immediate need to backport to 7.6 |
adriansr
pushed a commit
to adriansr/beats
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 14, 2020
In the previous module assertion we were checking the keys manually and if they didn't match we would just output the raw dictionary into the tests. This is not really useful because you have to either inspect them manually or user a local diff to know what exactly changes. This PR use DeepDiff to actually diff the two dictionary together and will output diff of the two dictionnary. This make debugging a little easier. (cherry picked from commit fa506a6)
5 tasks
adriansr
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 14, 2020
In the previous module assertion we were checking the keys manually and if they didn't match we would just output the raw dictionary into the tests. This is not really useful because you have to either inspect them manually or user a local diff to know what exactly changes. This PR use DeepDiff to actually diff the two dictionary together and will output diff of the two dictionnary. This make debugging a little easier. (cherry picked from commit fa506a6) Co-authored-by: Pier-Hugues Pellerin <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What does this PR do?
In the previous module assertion we were checking the keys manually and
if they didn't match we would just output the raw dictionary into the
tests. This is not really useful because you have to either inspect them
manually or user a local diff to know what exactly changes.
This PR use DeepDiff to actually diff the two dictionary together and
will output diff of the two dictionnary. This make debugging a little
easier.
Why is it important?
Checklist
Author's Checklist
How to test this PR locally
Related issues
Use cases
Screenshots
Logs