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

Remove server from physical storage summary test #4602

Merged

Conversation

tadeboro
Copy link
Contributor

@tadeboro tadeboro commented Sep 5, 2018

Setting physical servers on physical storage will not work since those two entities are connected through canisters.

This commit simply removes redundant parts of the spec that in no way affect the textual summary that this spec is testing.

Setting physical servers on physical storage will not work since those
two entities are connected through canisters.

This commit simply removes redundant parts of the spec that in no way
affect the textual summary that this spec is testing.
@mzazrivec mzazrivec added the test label Sep 5, 2018
@miq-bot
Copy link
Member

miq-bot commented Sep 5, 2018

Checked commit xlab-si@0b2490f with ruby 2.3.3, rubocop 0.52.1, haml-lint 0.20.0, and yamllint 1.10.0
1 file checked, 0 offenses detected
Everything looks fine. ⭐

@himdel
Copy link
Contributor

himdel commented Sep 5, 2018

Summarizing from gitter:

looks like the code was copied from spec/helpers/physical_chassis_helper/textual_summary_spec.rb and never actualy useful for physical storage

the only textual summary helpers touching computer systems are ContainerNodeHelper and PhysicalServerHelper

and it fixes travis :)
(original failure caused by ManageIQ/manageiq#17706)

👍

@himdel himdel self-assigned this Sep 5, 2018
@himdel himdel merged commit 5caa591 into ManageIQ:master Sep 5, 2018
@himdel himdel added this to the Sprint 94 Ending Sep 10, 2018 milestone Sep 5, 2018
@tadeboro tadeboro deleted the fix-physical-storage-textual-summary branch September 6, 2018 05:51
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants