Skip to content

feat: Add unit-test to check consistency of Notice field names.#1345

Merged
bdferris-v2 merged 9 commits intomasterfrom
issue/1324/rules_documentation_test
Mar 22, 2023
Merged

feat: Add unit-test to check consistency of Notice field names.#1345
bdferris-v2 merged 9 commits intomasterfrom
issue/1324/rules_documentation_test

Conversation

@bdferris-v2
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@bdferris-v2 bdferris-v2 commented Mar 1, 2023

While working on better alignment of code and documentation as part of #1324, I fixed a few inconsistent field names (e.g. filename vs fileName). But I also wonder if we could catch these inconsistencies earlier. This PR provides a unit-test that checks all Notice field names against a manually curated allow-list.

Any time a new field name is added, this unit-test will fail. When that happens, we hope the author will do one of the following:

  1. See there is an existing field name that might be more appropriate to use.
  2. If not, add their new field to the allow-list.

Please make sure these boxes are checked before submitting your pull request - thanks!

@bdferris-v2 bdferris-v2 requested a review from isabelle-dr March 1, 2023 14:38
@bdferris-v2
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

bdferris-v2 commented Mar 1, 2023

@isabelle-dr curious to get your thoughts on this

@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Mar 1, 2023

✅ Rule acceptance tests passed.
New Errors: 0 out of 1419 datasets (~0%) are invalid due to code change, which is less than the provided threshold of 1%.
Dropped Errors: 0 out of 1419 datasets (~0%) are invalid due to code change, which is less than the provided threshold of 1%.
0 out of 1419 sources (~0 %) are corrupted.
Commit: 1b563ee
Download the full acceptance test report here (report will disappear after 90 days).
✅ Rule acceptance tests passed.

@isabelle-dr
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

isabelle-dr commented Mar 6, 2023

Great addition! Can we see what it looks like when the test fails?

@bdferris-v2
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

bdferris-v2 commented Mar 7, 2023

Ideally, a developer would run gradlew test before submitting their PR (per the instructions) and get a failing unit test that would look like:

Screenshot 2023-03-06 at 4 03 22 PM

In this example, csvRowNumberA and csvRowNumberB are the new unexpected fields (artificial example). At that point, the developer would hopefully go look at NoticeFieldsTest. testNoticeClassFieldNames, see the instructions there, and either change their field names or update the test.

@isabelle-dr isabelle-dr added this to the 4.1.0 milestone Mar 20, 2023
davidgamez
davidgamez approved these changes Mar 22, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@davidgamez davidgamez left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM!

@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Mar 22, 2023

✅ Rule acceptance tests passed.
New Errors: 0 out of 1423 datasets (~0%) are invalid due to code change, which is less than the provided threshold of 1%.
Dropped Errors: 0 out of 1423 datasets (~0%) are invalid due to code change, which is less than the provided threshold of 1%.
New Warnings: 0 out of 1423 datasets (~0%) are invalid due to code change, which is less than the provided threshold of 1%.
Dropped Warnings: 0 out of 1423 datasets (~0%) are invalid due to code change, which is less than the provided threshold of 1%.
0 out of 1423 sources (~0 %) are corrupted.
Commit: 592b853
Download the full acceptance test report here (report will disappear after 90 days).
✅ Rule acceptance tests passed.

@bdferris-v2 bdferris-v2 merged commit 83efb84 into master Mar 22, 2023
@bdferris-v2 bdferris-v2 deleted the issue/1324/rules_documentation_test branch March 22, 2023 19:33
@isabelle-dr isabelle-dr mentioned this pull request Mar 24, 2023
Closed
@isabelle-dr isabelle-dr linked an issue Mar 27, 2023 that may be closed by this pull request
[feature request / refactor] Produce structured data containing human-readable code descriptions (refactor RULES.md) #1324
Closed
ryon pushed a commit to JarvusInnovations/gtfs-validator that referenced this pull request Apr 1, 2023
@bdferris-v2 @davidgamez @ryon
feat: Add unit-test to check consistency of Notice field names. (Mobi…
de8bd5e 
…lityData#1345)

* Add a unit-test that enforces consistency of Notice field names by checking against an allow-list of existing field names.

Co-authored-by: David Gamez <[email protected]>
bradyhunsaker pushed a commit to bradyhunsaker/gtfs-validator that referenced this pull request Apr 25, 2023
@bdferris-v2 @davidgamez @bradyhunsaker
feat: Add unit-test to check consistency of Notice field names. (Mobi…
c9f7e78 
…lityData#1345)

* Add a unit-test that enforces consistency of Notice field names by checking against an allow-list of existing field names.

Co-authored-by: David Gamez <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@davidgamez davidgamez davidgamez approved these changes

@isabelle-dr isabelle-dr Awaiting requested review from isabelle-dr

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

Schedule Validator Q2 backlog
Status: Done

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[feature request / refactor] Produce structured data containing human-readable code descriptions (refactor RULES.md)

3 participants

@bdferris-v2 @isabelle-dr @davidgamez