eugenegujing opened a new pull request, #7635:
URL: https://github.com/apache/texera/pull/7635
### What changes were proposed in this PR?
`ComputingUnitManagingResourceSpec` references a field named
`ownerGoogleAvatar` in two assertions, but `DashboardWorkflowComputingUnit`
declares it as `ownerAvatar` (`ComputingUnitManagingResource.scala:162`).
`main` therefore fails to compile its test sources:
```
[error] .../ComputingUnitManagingResourceSpec.scala:179:10: value
ownerGoogleAvatar is not a member of
org.apache.texera.service.resource.ComputingUnitManagingResource.DashboardWorkflowComputingUnit
[error] info.ownerGoogleAvatar shouldBe "owner-avatar"
[error] .../ComputingUnitManagingResourceSpec.scala:285:13: value
ownerGoogleAvatar is not a member of ...
[error] created.ownerGoogleAvatar shouldBe null
[error] two errors found
[error] (ComputingUnitManagingService / Test / compileIncremental)
Compilation failed
```
This renames the two references. The diff is two lines; no production file
is touched and no assertion's meaning changes.
Because Scala test compilation is per module, the impact is wider than two
assertions: **no test in `computing-unit-managing-service` has been able to
run.** `ComputingUnitHelpersSpec`, `AdminComputingUnitResourceSpec`,
`KubernetesClientSpec` and `ComputingUnitAccessResourceSpec` were all taken
down with it.
This is merge skew. #7563 (`06845321b`) renamed the field and correctly
updated the two specs that referenced it at the time —
`AdminComputingUnitResourceSpec` and `ComputingUnitHelpersSpec`, both of which
use `ownerAvatar` on `main` today. `ComputingUnitManagingResourceSpec` had no
avatar assertions then, so there was nothing to update. #7580 (`c7e7362a4`)
then added them from a branch based before the rename, and its CI ran against
that older base. `git merge-base --is-ancestor 06845321b c7e7362a4` returns
true, so the rename was already on `main` when #7580 landed.
### Any related issues, documentation, discussions?
Closes #7634
Introduced by the interaction of #7563 (the `ownerGoogleAvatar` →
`ownerAvatar` rename) and #7580 (which added the avatar assertions from a
pre-rename base).
### How was this PR tested?
`sbt "ComputingUnitManagingService/Test/compile"` fails on `main` with the
two errors above and succeeds on this branch.
`sbt "ComputingUnitManagingService/test"` on this branch: **116 tests across
8 suites, all passing.** None of those 116 could run on `main`.
`ComputingUnitManagingResourceSpec` itself passes 31/31 — the two assertions
were already correct, so nothing about their meaning had to change, only the
field name they read.
No other module is affected: the change is confined to one test file in one
module and renames a field reference to match an existing declaration. A
repo-wide `sbt Test/compile` across all sixteen aggregated modules succeeds on
this branch.
### Was this PR authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?
Generated-by: Claude Code (Claude Opus 5)
--
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]
