Skip to content

Conversation

rahulr-NI
Copy link
Contributor

@rahulr-NI rahulr-NI commented Sep 24, 2025

- [ ] I've updated CHANGELOG.md if applicable.

- [ ] I've added tests applicable for this pull request

What does this Pull Request accomplish?

This PR updates the nimi-python repository metadata files with those from NI's private repository, resolves ordering issues, and addresses default values.
It contains new APIs generated during codegen but not present in nimi-python.

What testing has been done?

Tox build is failing here as in gRPC, the abort api in generated codes is not implemented but the existing test cases are expecting it.

@rahulr-NI rahulr-NI changed the title Misc changes to match az do exports for nirfsg module Misc changes to match AzDo exports for nirfsg module Sep 24, 2025
@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Sep 24, 2025

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 50.00000% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 81.72%. Comparing base (3432530) to head (d825349).

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
generated/nifake/nifake/_grpc_stub_interpreter.py 0.00% 1 Missing ⚠️

❗ There is a different number of reports uploaded between BASE (3432530) and HEAD (d825349). Click for more details.

HEAD has 10 uploads less than BASE
Flag BASE (3432530) HEAD (d825349)
nifgensystemtests 1 0
nimodinstsystemtests 1 0
nirfsgsystemtests 1 0
nidcpowersystemtests 1 0
nidmmsystemtests 1 0
nitclksystemtests 1 0
nisesystemtests 1 0
nidigitalsystemtests 1 0
niswitchsystemtests 1 0
niscopesystemtests 1 0
Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #2134      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   89.07%   81.72%   -7.35%     
==========================================
  Files          71       29      -42     
  Lines       18960     4116   -14844     
==========================================
- Hits        16889     3364   -13525     
+ Misses       2071      752    -1319     
Flag Coverage Δ
codegenunittests 84.44% <ø> (ø)
nidcpowersystemtests ?
nidcpowerunittests 89.53% <ø> (ø)
nidigitalsystemtests ?
nidigitalunittests 68.44% <ø> (ø)
nidmmsystemtests ?
nifakeunittests 85.53% <50.00%> (+0.01%) ⬆️
nifgensystemtests ?
nimodinstsystemtests ?
nimodinstunittests 94.20% <ø> (ø)
nirfsgsystemtests ?
niscopesystemtests ?
niscopeunittests 43.20% <ø> (ø)
nisesystemtests ?
niswitchsystemtests ?
nitclksystemtests ?
nitclkunittests 98.26% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
generated/nifake/nifake/session.py 77.55% <100.00%> (+0.04%) ⬆️
generated/nifake/nifake/_grpc_stub_interpreter.py 83.06% <0.00%> (ø)

... and 46 files with indirect coverage changes


Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 3432530...d825349. Read the comment docs.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@rahulr-NI rahulr-NI changed the title Misc changes to match AzDo exports for nirfsg module Misc changes to match metadatada version for nifake Sep 24, 2025
@rahulr-NI rahulr-NI changed the title Misc changes to match metadatada version for nifake Update the order and default values in nifake metadata Sep 24, 2025
@rahulr-NI rahulr-NI marked this pull request as ready for review September 24, 2025 06:19
'description': 'Aborts a previously initiated thingie.'
},
'included_in_proto': True,
'included_in_proto': False,
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Abort is such a common function that it's strange not to include in the example/fake/test metadata

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes.. Thats why I did not modify any portion of metadata that being generated from AzDo. We will need to create some stories to issues to make the necessary changes to Match AzDo version of metadata generated from AzDo to version present in GitHub. Which also should include the necessary test cases.

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants