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

Issue 3166 - New option to suppress status update in replication workflow processes #3182

Conversation

josephrignanese
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@josephrignanese josephrignanese changed the title #3166 - New option to suppress status update in replication workflow processes Issue 3166 - New option to suppress status update in replication workflow processes Sep 13, 2023
@josephrignanese
Copy link
Contributor Author

Fix for #3166

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Sep 13, 2023

Codecov Report

Merging #3182 (18af767) into master (a75bb29) will decrease coverage by 0.01%.
The diff coverage is 14.28%.

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##             master    #3182      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     55.25%   55.24%   -0.01%     
  Complexity     5434     5434              
============================================
  Files           713      713              
  Lines         29109    29116       +7     
  Branches       3767     3767              
============================================
+ Hits          16084    16085       +1     
- Misses        11512    11518       +6     
  Partials       1513     1513              
Files Changed Coverage Δ
...process/impl/ParameterizedActivatePageProcess.java 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...ocess/impl/ParameterizedDeactivatePageProcess.java 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...cess/impl/ReplicateWithOptionsWorkflowProcess.java 98.03% <100.00%> (+0.03%) ⬆️

@josephrignanese
Copy link
Contributor Author

josephrignanese commented Sep 14, 2023

I investigated adding unit tests for the ParameterizedActivatePageProcess and ParameterizedDeactivatePageProcess classes. This seems to require the use of another test framework like PowerMockito to allow handling of the superclass methods.

@josephrignanese
Copy link
Contributor Author

Further to the above, it seems the latest version of PowerMock (2.0.9) does not support Mockito 4 powermock/powermock#1112

@davidjgonzalez davidjgonzalez merged commit 197df67 into Adobe-Consulting-Services:master Sep 14, 2023
9 of 10 checks passed
YegorKozlov pushed a commit to YegorKozlov/acs-aem-commons that referenced this pull request Oct 19, 2023
…flow processes (Adobe-Consulting-Services#3182)

* 3166 - Added suppressStatusUpdate option

---------

Co-authored-by: david g <[email protected]>
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