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

yt-fts v0.1.47 (new formula) #170856

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

NotJoeMartinez
Copy link

  • Have you followed the guidelines for contributing?
  • Have you ensured that your commits follow the commit style guide?
  • Have you checked that there aren't other open pull requests for the same formula update/change?
  • Have you built your formula locally with HOMEBREW_NO_INSTALL_FROM_API=1 brew install --build-from-source <formula>, where <formula> is the name of the formula you're submitting?
  • Is your test running fine brew test <formula>, where <formula> is the name of the formula you're submitting?
  • Does your build pass brew audit --strict <formula> (after doing HOMEBREW_NO_INSTALL_FROM_API=1 brew install --build-from-source <formula>)? If this is a new formula, does it pass brew audit --new <formula>?

New formula for yt-fts v0.1.47

@github-actions github-actions bot added autosquash Automatically squash pull request commits according to Homebrew style. python Python use is a significant feature of the PR or issue new formula PR adds a new formula to Homebrew/homebrew-core rust Rust use is a significant feature of the PR or issue labels May 5, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented May 5, 2024

Thanks for contributing to Homebrew! 🎉 It looks like you're having trouble with a CI failure. See our contribution guide for help. You may be most interested in the section on dealing with CI failures. You can find the CI logs in the Checks tab of your pull request.


test do
# Test basic functionality
assert_match "yt_fts version: 0.1.47", shell_output("#{bin}/yt-fts --version")
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We need a test that exercises the some of the functionality of the app. Version checks or usage checks (foo --version or foo --help) are not sufficient, as explained in the formula cookbook.

In most cases, a good test would involve running a simple test case: run #{bin}/foo input.txt.

  • Then you can check that the output is as expected (with assert_equal or assert_match on the output of shell_output)
  • You can also check that an output file was created, if that is expected: assert_predicate testpath/"output.txt", :exist?

Some advice for specific cases:

  • If the formula is a library, compile and run some simple code that links against it. It could be taken from upstream's documentation / source examples.
  • If the formula is for a GUI program, try to find some function that runs as command-line only, like a format conversion, reading or displaying a config file, etc.
  • If the software cannot function without credentials, a test could be to try to connect with invalid credentials (or without credentials) and confirm that it fails as expected.
  • Same if the software requires a virtual machine, docker instance, etc. to be running.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
autosquash Automatically squash pull request commits according to Homebrew style. new formula PR adds a new formula to Homebrew/homebrew-core python Python use is a significant feature of the PR or issue rust Rust use is a significant feature of the PR or issue
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants