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

test(api): Add some absorbance reader integration tests #16740

Merged

Conversation

SyntaxColoring
Copy link
Contributor

Overview

This adds tests to capture some of the current behavior of the absorbance reader module, as the Python Protocol API simulator sees it. This is regression protection for RQA-3471 / PR #16734.

Test Plan and Hands on Testing

Make sure CI passes.

Review requests

Is all of this captured behavior good and intentional, or is there anything we should mark as something that we want to change, or that we're okay with changing?

Risk assessment

Tests only. No risk to production code.

There's a thread leak inherent to these tests/protocol_api_integration tests, since simulate.get_protocol_api() doesn't have a .close() method. With every test that we add here, we're risking flakiness in CI if we hit the CI runner's thread limit.

@SyntaxColoring SyntaxColoring requested a review from a team as a code owner November 8, 2024 15:31
@SyntaxColoring SyntaxColoring changed the title test(api): Add Absorbance reader integration test test(api): Add some absorbance reader integration tests Nov 8, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

@vegano1 vegano1 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thank you for adding these.

@SyntaxColoring SyntaxColoring merged commit 2fda991 into chore_release-8.2.0 Nov 8, 2024
26 checks passed
@SyntaxColoring SyntaxColoring deleted the absorbance_reader_integration_test branch November 8, 2024 15:57
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 this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants