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

Flush out the remainder of test_link.py #218

Closed
schwehr opened this issue Oct 27, 2020 · 3 comments
Closed

Flush out the remainder of test_link.py #218

schwehr opened this issue Oct 27, 2020 · 3 comments
Milestone

Comments

@schwehr
Copy link
Collaborator

schwehr commented Oct 27, 2020

Things todo and questions to answer from working on #211

  • Does class Link need an __eq__? And the same for many of the other classes. The default behavior isn't very useful - Moved to Should more classes have __eq__ and/or __repr__ #222
  • test_minimal: Cannot call link.get_href() after set_owner. Got an error
  • test_minimal: Test link.resolve_stac_object()
  • Test get_href when href is absolute and there is an owner
  • Test get_absolute_href when there is an owner
  • Test when resolve_stac_object on link when target is a str.
schwehr added a commit to schwehr/pystac that referenced this issue Oct 27, 2020
@cholmes cholmes added this to the 1.0.0 milestone May 24, 2021
@duckontheweb duckontheweb modified the milestones: 1.0.0, 1.1.0 Jul 8, 2021
@schwehr schwehr changed the title Flush out the remained of test_link.py Flush out the remainder of test_link.py Jul 21, 2021
@duckontheweb duckontheweb removed this from the 1.1.0 milestone Jul 30, 2021
@duckontheweb duckontheweb added this to the 1.4.0 milestone Jan 18, 2022
@duckontheweb duckontheweb removed this from the 1.4.0 milestone Feb 23, 2022
@duckontheweb
Copy link
Contributor

Moving this out of the 1.4.0 release since it does not seem critical

@gadomski gadomski added this to the 1.8 milestone Jan 31, 2023
@jsignell
Copy link
Member

It is a little hard to map these back to the current state of the tests, but I am fairly confident that all the cases listed in the original description are captured in the tests at this point.

This is probably fine to close.

@gadomski
Copy link
Member

Yeah, I think so too. There are some slightly worrying misses in the link.py coverage but I don't think any of the suggested fixes in this issue touch those. Closing as done.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants