mirror of
https://github.com/renovatebot/renovate.git
synced 2026-10-27 07:50:47 +00:00
Michael Kriese
f7e8104511
* test(workers/repository): cover five pr body and warning guards - an upgrade with no release notes of its own, which gets no summary title while the branch as a whole has notes - an upgrade with no homepage, source or dependency url, whose name is therefore left unlinked - an upgrade that defines no pr body columns - an assignee list that filtering empties out - a second warned dependency in a package file that is already listed, so the file is not recorded twice Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 <michael.kriese+claude-code@mend.io> * test(workers/repository): cover four changelog guards - `massageName` gets a describe of its own: it is exported but was only ever reached through a release that carried a tag, so the no-version path and the empty-result path went untaken - a lone in-range release with no earlier one to prepend - a bitbucket tree holding exactly one changelog candidate, so nothing is logged about choosing between several - a bitbucket-server source url that parses but matches neither the git nor the web repository pattern Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 <michael.kriese+claude-code@mend.io> * test(workers/repository): cover both extract failure paths - a manager whose `extractAllPackageFiles` returns null, so there is nothing to massage dep names in - a file whose `extractPackageFile` returns nothing, so it contributes no package file Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 <michael.kriese+claude-code@mend.io> * ci: ratchet the branch coverage threshold A full run on this branch reports 100% statements (49491/49491), 100% functions (7384/7384), 100% lines (48981/48981) and 99.86% branches (25726/25761), up from 99.82% on the branch below. The threshold moves to 99.84, keeping the same rounding-down margin as before. Statements, functions and lines are already pinned at 100 and stay there. Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 <michael.kriese+claude-code@mend.io> * test(workers/repository): cover four process guards - a libyear update released before the version currently in use, which yields a negative age and is therefore not counted - a pr that is closed, and one raised from the onboarding branch, neither of which counts towards the concurrent pr limit - a second base branch whose package files do not displace the first one's, on a platform that cannot sync a fork with its upstream The fork case redefines `syncForkWithUpstream` rather than deleting it, the same way the migration branch spec handles `refreshPr`. Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 <michael.kriese+claude-code@mend.io> * test(workers/repository): cover the extract cache guards - a cached extract whose manager fingerprints all still match, so the cache is reusable; the test reads the expected fingerprint out of `hashMap` rather than hard-coding a hash that regenerates - an extract that is told not to overwrite the cache - a cached scan for a branch that is still a configured base branch, so it survives the clean-up that drops the others With these, `lib/workers/repository/process` is fully covered. Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 <michael.kriese+claude-code@mend.io> * test(workers/repository): cover the branchPrefixOld miss `prAlreadyExisted` retries the lookup under the old branch prefix, but every test either hit on the first lookup or on the second, so the case where both miss went untaken. Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 <michael.kriese+claude-code@mend.io> * ci: ratchet the branch coverage threshold to 99.87 The tests added after the earlier bump in this branch close eight more branches. A full run now reports 100% statements (49491/49491), 100% functions (7384/7384), 100% lines (48981/48981) and 99.89% branches (25734/25761). The threshold moves from 99.84 to 99.87, keeping the same rounding-down margin as before. Statements, functions and lines are already pinned at 100 and stay there. Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 <michael.kriese+claude-code@mend.io> * test(workers/repository): cover three changelog embedding guards The pr worker copies release notes off each upgrade's changelog result. Three of its guards were never taken because every test supplied a complete result for a distinct repository: - a changelog with no project, so no repo name is recorded - a changelog with a project but no versions, so no releases are copied - a second upgrade for a repository whose notes were already committed, which is skipped rather than repeated Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 <michael.kriese+claude-code@mend.io> --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 <michael.kriese+claude-code@mend.io>