zjncs commented on PR #5620: URL: https://github.com/apache/rocketmq-dashboard/pull/5620#issuecomment-6076682037
Hi @lizhimins, thanks for catching all of these! The PR has been reworked accordingly, rebased onto `rocketmq-studio` (c99b9ad5) and retargeted. Point by point: - **The missed third consumer**: `cluster.test.ts`'s fixture and its `upgradeNameServer` call now send `targetVersion`, and I re-ran `tsc -b` (the `npm run build` step) — it is clean now. You were right that the description's claim had gone stale. - **The `newAddr` mismatch**: I took the second option — the test-header note is gone, and the contract mismatch is now tracked in #5776 (UpdateNameServerDTO has no `newAddr` field while `api/cluster.ts` and `clusterService.ts` send one; either the DTO or the callers need to align, including the mock-mode address rewrite). I kept it out of this PR to leave it single-purpose. - **`expect.assertions`**: the folded test starts with `expect.assertions(4)` so a reply that never matched the handler cannot pass silently. - **The fourth cluster test file**: it is deleted; the upgrade-contract case now lives next to the existing `/nameservers` operation test in `cluster.test.ts`, reusing its mock setup and asserting `targetVersion` is sent while `version` is not. - **Trailing newlines**: restored on all touched files. Verification: `vitest run` green for the `src/api` and `src/services` suites (248 + 111 tests) and `tsc -b` clean. -- 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]
