[DO NOT MERGE] Well Known Types tests#1244
Conversation
|
Please ensure that the NEXT_CHANGELOG.md file is updated with any relevant changes. |
| }, | ||
| ForceSendFields: []string{"FilterBy"}, | ||
| } | ||
| pb, err := listClustersRequestToPb(&r) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
query.Values only checks the interface for the fields of the object passed, not the object itself.
This means that the top level entity must have the url annotation in the fields for the name to be correct.
This is already like this in the create methods (we pass the PB struct). Replicating this in this test.
88df874 to
4e7634c
Compare
4e7634c to
4f670c0
Compare
c92dba6 to
e28d3fc
Compare
|
If integration tests don't run automatically, an authorized user can run them manually by following the instructions below: Trigger: Inputs:
Checks will be approved automatically on success. |
What changes are proposed in this pull request?
Provide the readers and reviewers with the information they need to understand
this PR in a comprehensive manner.
Specifically, try to answer the two following questions:
major changes to allow the reader to quickly understand the PR without having
to look at the code.
reader might be missing. For example, were there any decisions behind the
change that are not reflected in the code itself?
The “why part” is the most important of the two as it usually cannot be
inferred from the code itself. A well-written PR description will help future
developers (including your future self) to know how to interact and update your
code.
How is this tested?
Describe any tests you have done; especially if test tests are not part of
the unit tests (e.g. local tests).
ALWAYS ANSWER THIS QUESTION: Answer with "N/A" if tests are not applicable
to your PR (e.g. if the PR only modifies comments). Do not be afraid of
answering "Not tested" if the PR has not been tested. Being clear about what
has been done and not done provides important context to the reviewers.