ahilashsasidharan commented on PR #70831: URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/70831#issuecomment-5162418061
Follow up question for some of my related commits in this series: #70874 & #70634 1. Both make similar changes to different provider files but do not have testcases that fail without the PR and emphasise the specific logic for each check being written as it is (i.e. with `is not None` or without `is None`). Is it worth going back to add additional parameterised testcases for these? 2. Should these also have a comments to highlight the split between sibling validation to avoid future confusion by readers? -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
