forked from cleveragents/cleveragents-core
freemo
051ee7c290
Added 52 new .feature files and corresponding _steps.py files targeting previously uncovered code paths in the following areas: - TUI layer: app, commands, persona (state/schema/registry), widgets, input (shell_exec, reference_parser) - Application services: plan lifecycle/service/executor, session, project, repo indexing, correction, checkpoint, actor, llm_actors, strategy coordinator, resource file watcher, service retry wiring - CLI commands: session, resource, repl, plan, db, automation_profile - Domain models: retry_policy, resource_type, cost_budget, docker_compose_analyzer, detail_level, _sql_string_aware, _postgresql_helpers - Core: circuit_breaker, retry_service_patterns - Infrastructure: repositories, transaction_sandbox, strategy_registry, plugins/loader, container - Config: settings - Agents: plan_generation, context_analysis, auto_debug - A2A: facade All new tests follow the Behave/Gherkin BDD standard. Resolved step definition collisions with unique prefixes. Fixed Alembic fileConfig logger disabling issue (disable_existing_loggers=False). ISSUES CLOSED: #1068
49 lines
2.5 KiB
Gherkin
49 lines
2.5 KiB
Gherkin
Feature: Repo indexing service coverage boost
|
|
Additional scenarios targeting uncovered error-handling paths in
|
|
repo_indexing_service.py (lines 182-185, 219-236, 367-368+).
|
|
|
|
Background:
|
|
Given a coverage-boost fresh in-memory indexing service
|
|
|
|
# -- Walk failure + persist_status double-fault (lines 182-185) ----------
|
|
|
|
Scenario: Walk failure on fresh resource with persist_status also failing logs warning
|
|
Given a coverage-boost temporary directory with sample files
|
|
When walk_and_index is mocked to fail and persist_status also fails on a fresh resource
|
|
Then a coverage-boost error should have been raised
|
|
And the coverage-boost double-fault warning about walk failure should have been logged
|
|
|
|
# -- persist_index failure on fresh resource (lines 219-228) -------------
|
|
|
|
Scenario: persist_index failure on fresh resource persists ERROR status
|
|
Given a coverage-boost temporary directory with sample files
|
|
When walk_and_index succeeds but persist_index fails on a fresh resource
|
|
Then a coverage-boost error should have been raised
|
|
And the coverage-boost persisted status should be "error"
|
|
|
|
# -- persist_index failure + persist_status double-fault (lines 231-234, 236) --
|
|
|
|
Scenario: persist_index failure with persist_status also failing logs warning
|
|
Given a coverage-boost temporary directory with sample files
|
|
When walk_and_index succeeds but persist_index and persist_status both fail on a fresh resource
|
|
Then a coverage-boost error should have been raised
|
|
And the coverage-boost double-fault warning about persist failure should have been logged
|
|
|
|
# -- persist_index failure on existing good index (lines 219-236 else branch) --
|
|
|
|
Scenario: persist_index failure on existing good index re-raises without ERROR status
|
|
Given a coverage-boost temporary directory with sample files
|
|
And a coverage-boost successful full index exists
|
|
When persist_index is mocked to fail during re-index of the existing resource
|
|
Then a coverage-boost error should have been raised
|
|
And the coverage-boost persisted status should still be "ready"
|
|
|
|
# -- refresh_index: persist_index failure (lines 367-368) ----------------
|
|
|
|
Scenario: refresh_index persist failure logs warning and re-raises
|
|
Given a coverage-boost temporary directory with sample files
|
|
And a coverage-boost successful full index exists
|
|
When persist_index is mocked to fail during refresh
|
|
Then a coverage-boost error should have been raised
|
|
And the coverage-boost refresh persist warning should have been logged
|