server: fix unexported-return lint issue #19052
Conversation
Signed-off-by: adeyemi <[email protected]>
|
Hi @aladesawe. Thanks for your PR. I'm waiting for a etcd-io member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the I understand the commands that are listed here. Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. |
|
Hi, @aladesawe. Thanks for your pull request 🙇.
Do you know how many issues there are in server? If there are not too many, it may be better to open a single pull request. We ideally want to keep the PR under 100 or 200 lines. Thanks, again. |
Hello @ivanvc sure thing, I'll pull more updates into this PR. There are about 10 more files with the error under the server module. |
…sabled Signed-off-by: adeyemi <[email protected]>
aladesawe
changed the title
|
/ok-to-test |
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files
... and 29 files with indirect coverage changes @@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #19052 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 68.83% 68.85% +0.01%
==========================================
Files 420 420
Lines 35678 35680 +2
==========================================
+ Hits 24560 24567 +7
+ Misses 9688 9687 -1
+ Partials 1430 1426 -4 Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.
|
|
/test pull-etcd-govulncheck |
|
@aladesawe, I'm sorry it took me a while to respond to this pull request. I was out for the holidays and had a long backlog. A heads up that I raised this question in a similar pull request: #19105 (comment) Thanks for bearing with us :) |
No worries Ivan, understandable :). I see the comment, and will follow the conversation there. |
server/auth/store_test.go
Outdated
| if !ok { | ||
| t.Fatal(errors.New("addUserWithNoOption: needs an AuthStore implementation")) | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| if !ok { | |
| t.Fatal(errors.New("addUserWithNoOption: needs an AuthStore implementation")) | |
| } | |
| require.True(t, ok, "addUserWithNoOption: needs an AuthStore implementation") |
| if !ok { | ||
| t.Fatal(errors.New("TestWatchNoEventLossOnCompact: needs a WatchableKV implementation")) | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| if !ok { | |
| t.Fatal(errors.New("TestWatchNoEventLossOnCompact: needs a WatchableKV implementation")) | |
| } | |
| require.True(t, ok, "TestWatchNoEventLossOnCompact: needs a WatchableKV implementation") |
| if !ok { | ||
| t.Fatal(errors.New("TestWatchBatchUnsynced: needs a WatchableKV implementation")) | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| if !ok { | |
| t.Fatal(errors.New("TestWatchBatchUnsynced: needs a WatchableKV implementation")) | |
| } | |
| require.True(t, ok, "TestWatchBatchUnsynced: needs a WatchableKV implementation") |
Signed-off-by: adeyemi <[email protected]>
|
@aladesawe: The following tests failed, say
Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR. Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: aladesawe, ivanvc, mmorel-35 The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
PR to fix
unexported-returnlint issues under theserverfolder as mentioned in Issue 18370.This PR:
authpackage, and uses the existingAuthStoreinterface as the type returned byNewAuthStorein the auth/store.go fileNewServerVersionAdapterreturnsserverversion.ServerinterfaceApplierMembershipforNewApplierMembership's return typeStorageRecorderreturn type forNewStorageRecorderandNewStorageRecorderStreamunexported-returnfor the mvcc/kvstore.goNewStorefunction. It appears the function is used internally, opted to disable versus using type assertions in the mvcc packageWALVersioninterface definition to thewalpackage, and using an alias in schemaPlease read https://github.com/etcd-io/etcd/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#contribution-flow.