tests: Add unit tests for project list command by rkcoder101 · Pull Request #692 · goharbor/harbor-cli

rkcoder101 · 2026-02-08T07:13:22Z

Description

This PR introduces unit tests for the user list command (cmd/harbor/root/project/list.go)

Solves a part of #591

Functions covered:

fetchProjects()
BuildListOptions()
PrintProjects()
ListProjectCommand()

codecov · 2026-02-08T07:16:01Z

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 73.07692% with 14 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 7.95%. Comparing base (60ad0bd) to head (3b7752c).
⚠️ Report is 98 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
cmd/harbor/root/project/list.go	79.16%	8 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
pkg/views/project/list/view.go	0.00%	4 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##             main    #692      +/-   ##
=========================================
- Coverage   10.99%   7.95%   -3.04%     
=========================================
  Files         173     260      +87     
  Lines        8671   12920    +4249     
=========================================
+ Hits          953    1028      +75     
- Misses       7612   11781    +4169     
- Partials      106     111       +5

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

Copilot

Pull request overview

This PR improves unit test coverage for the harbor project list command by extracting testable helper functions from ListProjectCommand() and adding a dedicated test suite for listing, pagination, query building, output formatting, and command flag wiring.

Changes:

Added BuildListOptions() and PrintProjects() helpers to make list logic testable outside of Cobra’s RunE.
Refactored ListProjectCommand() to use the new helpers.
Added list_test.go covering fetchProjects(), BuildListOptions(), PrintProjects(), and ListProjectCommand().

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated 4 comments.

File	Description
`cmd/harbor/root/project/list.go`	Refactors list command to delegate option building and printing to helpers (enables unit testing).
`cmd/harbor/root/project/list_test.go`	Adds unit tests for pagination, query construction, output formatting paths, and Cobra flag defaults.

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

cmd/harbor/root/project/list_test.go

cmd/harbor/root/project/list.go

cmd/harbor/root/project/list_test.go

rkcoder101 · 2026-02-09T17:41:05Z

Hi @qcserestipy @bupd @Vad1mo @NucleoFusion kindly give these tests a review. Thanks!

cmd/harbor/root/project/list.go

bupd

@rkcoder101 please resolve conflicts

and fix the suggestion.

bupd · 2026-02-18T08:02:32Z

cmd/harbor/root/project/list.go

+func PrintProjects(allProjects []*models.Project) error {
+	log.WithField("count", len(allProjects)).Debug("Number of projects fetched")
+	if len(allProjects) == 0 {
+		log.Info("No projects found")
+		return nil
+	}
+	formatFlag := viper.GetString("output-format")
+	if formatFlag != "" {
+		log.WithField("output_format", formatFlag).Debug("Output format selected")
+		err := utils.PrintFormat(allProjects, formatFlag)
+		if err != nil {
+			return err
+		}
+	} else {
+		log.Debug("Listing projects using default view")
+		if err := list.ListProjects(allProjects); err != nil {
+			return err
+		}
+	}
+	return nil
+}


I dont think we need this one. Isnt there a global util function used for printing tables and outputs. ??

Actually this is not something which I have written; this piece of code was already written inside the RunE of ListProjectCommand. I just separated out the printing logic into a function for creating a testable unit. The util function which you are referring to (utils.PrintFormat()) is actually used in the above code.

Copilot

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 3 out of 3 changed files in this pull request and generated 6 comments.

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

Copilot · 2026-02-18T08:05:56Z

cmd/harbor/root/project/list_test.go

+		return *res, fmt.Errorf("mock list error")
+	}
+	if len(opts) == 0 {
+		return *res, fmt.Errorf("No options passed")


The error message "No options passed" should be "no options passed" to follow Go's error message conventions (lowercase unless starting with proper nouns or exported identifiers).

Suggested change

return *res, fmt.Errorf("No options passed")

return *res, fmt.Errorf("no options passed")

Copilot · 2026-02-18T08:05:57Z

cmd/harbor/root/project/list_test.go

+	log "github.com/sirupsen/logrus"
+	"github.com/spf13/viper"
+	"github.com/stretchr/testify/assert"
+	"go.yaml.in/yaml/v4"


The codebase consistently uses gopkg.in/yaml.v2 for YAML parsing across all production code (e.g., cmd/harbor/root/configurations/apply.go:30, pkg/config/replication/policies.go:24, pkg/config/robot/robot.go:41). While go.yaml.in/yaml/v4 is available in go.mod, introducing it in tests creates an inconsistency and adds an additional dependency. Consider using gopkg.in/yaml.v2 to align with the existing codebase convention. If v4 is needed for specific features, this decision should be documented.

Suggested change

"go.yaml.in/yaml/v4"

"gopkg.in/yaml.v2"

Copilot · 2026-02-18T08:05:57Z

pkg/views/project/list/view.go

-		fmt.Println("Error running program:", err)
-		os.Exit(1)
+	if _, err := tea.NewProgram(m, tea.WithOutput(os.Stdout), tea.WithInput(nil)).Run(); err != nil {
+		return fmt.Errorf("Error running program:%w", err)


The error message format is missing a space before the colon. It should be "Error running program: %w" instead of "Error running program:%w" for consistent error formatting.

Suggested change

return fmt.Errorf("Error running program:%w", err)

return fmt.Errorf("Error running program: %w", err)

Copilot · 2026-02-18T08:05:57Z

cmd/harbor/root/project/list.go

-			if len(allProjects) == 0 {
-				log.Info("No projects found")
-				return nil
+				return fmt.Errorf("%s", utils.ParseHarborErrorMsg(err))


Using fmt.Errorf("%s", ...) is an anti-pattern in Go. The format verb "%s" doesn't add any value here. Based on the codebase convention, this should be fmt.Errorf("failed to get projects list: %v", utils.ParseHarborErrorMsg(err)) to provide clearer context about what operation failed, similar to how it's done in other commands throughout the codebase.

Suggested change

return fmt.Errorf("%s", utils.ParseHarborErrorMsg(err))

return fmt.Errorf("failed to get projects list: %v", utils.ParseHarborErrorMsg(err))

Copilot · 2026-02-18T08:05:57Z

cmd/harbor/root/project/list_test.go

@@ -0,0 +1,608 @@
+// Copyright Project Harbor Authors


The PR description states "This PR introduces unit tests for the user list command" but should say "project list command" based on the PR title and the actual code being tested. The description should be corrected for accuracy.

Copilot · 2026-02-18T08:05:58Z

cmd/harbor/root/project/list.go

+	}
+
+	if private && public {
+		return nil, fmt.Errorf("Cannot specify both --private and --public flags")


The codebase predominantly uses lowercase error messages (e.g., "failed to..." instead of "Failed to..."). The error message "Cannot specify both --private and --public flags" should be "cannot specify both --private and --public flags" to follow the established convention seen throughout the codebase.

Suggested change

return nil, fmt.Errorf("Cannot specify both --private and --public flags")

return nil, fmt.Errorf("cannot specify both --private and --public flags")

…commits squashed to resolve conflicts) Signed-off-by: Rayyan Khan <rayyanrehman101@gmail.com>

Signed-off-by: Rayyan Khan <rayyanrehman101@gmail.com>

rkcoder101 marked this pull request as ready for review February 8, 2026 10:42

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings February 8, 2026 10:42

Copilot started reviewing on behalf of rkcoder101 February 8, 2026 10:43 View session

Copilot AI reviewed Feb 8, 2026

View reviewed changes

cmd/harbor/root/project/list_test.go Show resolved Hide resolved

cmd/harbor/root/project/list_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

cmd/harbor/root/project/list.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

cmd/harbor/root/project/list_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

NucleoFusion reviewed Feb 9, 2026

View reviewed changes

cmd/harbor/root/project/list.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

qcserestipy mentioned this pull request Feb 16, 2026

Incrementally improve unit test coverage #591

Open

bupd requested a review from Copilot February 18, 2026 08:01

Copilot started reviewing on behalf of bupd February 18, 2026 08:01 View session

bupd requested changes Feb 18, 2026

View reviewed changes

Copilot AI reviewed Feb 18, 2026

View reviewed changes

test/refactor: refactor project list command and add unit tests (all …

2efeb88

…commits squashed to resolve conflicts) Signed-off-by: Rayyan Khan <rayyanrehman101@gmail.com>

rkcoder101 force-pushed the test/project-list branch from 35a876d to 2efeb88 Compare February 19, 2026 17:17

fix/added fixes recommended in copilot review

3b7752c

Signed-off-by: Rayyan Khan <rayyanrehman101@gmail.com>

	return *res, fmt.Errorf("No options passed")
	return *res, fmt.Errorf("no options passed")

	return fmt.Errorf("Error running program:%w", err)
	return fmt.Errorf("Error running program: %w", err)

	return fmt.Errorf("%s", utils.ParseHarborErrorMsg(err))
	return fmt.Errorf("failed to get projects list: %v", utils.ParseHarborErrorMsg(err))

	return nil, fmt.Errorf("Cannot specify both --private and --public flags")
	return nil, fmt.Errorf("cannot specify both --private and --public flags")

Comments

Conversation

rkcoder101 commented Feb 8, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Description

Functions covered:

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Feb 8, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Reviewed changes

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

rkcoder101 commented Feb 9, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

bupd left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

bupd Feb 18, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

rkcoder101 Feb 19, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 18, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

rkcoder101 Feb 19, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 18, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

rkcoder101 Feb 19, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 18, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 18, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

rkcoder101 Feb 19, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 18, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

rkcoder101 Feb 19, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Feb 18, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

rkcoder101 Feb 19, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

rkcoder101 commented Feb 8, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Feb 8, 2026 •

edited

Loading

rkcoder101 Feb 19, 2026 •

edited

Loading