-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 32.5k
Remove the get_phrase_cfws_only_raises test #24871
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
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Hello, and thanks for your contribution! I'm a bot set up to make sure that the project can legally accept this contribution by verifying everyone involved has signed the PSF contributor agreement (CLA). CLA MissingOur records indicate the following people have not signed the CLA: For legal reasons we need all the people listed to sign the CLA before we can look at your contribution. Please follow the steps outlined in the CPython devguide to rectify this issue. If you have recently signed the CLA, please wait at least one business day You can check yourself to see if the CLA has been received. Thanks again for the contribution, we look forward to reviewing it! |
This PR is stale because it has been open for 30 days with no activity. |
Ping. Still waiting for review. |
This test's name does not start with test_, which prevents it from running. Apparently it was accidentally added this way. None of the callers of get_phrase() assume it can raise exceptions, so simply dropping the test seems best. The fact that the phrase is invalid still gets recorded in defects.
53f5acf
to
799ebe1
Compare
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
I am closing as this test passes and no reasoning for why it should be removed is provided. |
Uh...the test does NOT pass, it is not even run, as I'm explaining in
the commit message. And if you rename it so it is run, it will fail.
|
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
I do not check commit messages on PRs and I missed your note, I see, that is indeed correct. The test should not be removed, it should instead be corrected to check for the defect. CC @bitdancer who added the test |
No description provided.