#56: Added Slick Unit Test #69
Conversation
|
Hi @satendrakumar, Thank you for your contribution! We really value the time you've taken to put this together. Before we proceed with reviewing this pull request, please sign the Lightbend Contributors License Agreement: |
|
I signed the CLA |
|
@wsargent Done. |
…ork#70) **/plugins.sbt: addSbtPlugin("com.typesafe.play" % "sbt-plugin" % "2.6.16") **build.gradle: def playVersion = "2.6.16"
…ork#71) **/plugins.sbt: addSbtPlugin("com.typesafe.play" % "sbt-plugin" % "2.6.17") **build.gradle: def playVersion = "2.6.17"
…ork#73) **/build.properties: sbt.version=1.2.1 **/plugins.sbt: addSbtPlugin("com.typesafe.play" % "sbt-plugin" % "2.6.18") **build.gradle: def playVersion = "2.6.18" **gradle/wrapper/gradle-wrapper.properties: distributionUrl=https\://services.gradle.org/distributions/gradle-4.9-bin.zip
…ork#74) **/plugins.sbt: addSbtPlugin("com.typesafe.play" % "sbt-plugin" % "2.6.19") **build.gradle: def playVersion = "2.6.19"
```
Updated with template-control on 2018-10-08T19:11:41.281Z
**/plugins.sbt:
addSbtPlugin("com.typesafe.play" % "sbt-plugin" % "2.6.20")
**build.gradle:
def playVersion = "2.6.20"
```
* Updated with template-control on 2018-11-29T15:50:43.767Z
/.mergify.yml:
wrote /.mergify.yml
**build.sbt:
scalaVersion := "2.12.7"
* Remove JDK 9 & 10
…ork#79) /.travis.yml: wrote /.travis.yml **build.sbt: scalaVersion := "2.12.8" **/build.properties: sbt.version=1.2.8
…ork#85) **/plugins.sbt: addSbtPlugin("com.typesafe.play" % "sbt-plugin" % "2.6.21") **build.gradle: def playVersion = "2.6.21"
```
Updated with template-control on 2019-01-16T12:08:45.037Z
/LICENSE:
wrote /LICENSE
/NOTICE:
wrote /NOTICE
/.mergify.yml:
wrote /.mergify.yml
```
…ork#89) /.mergify.yml: wrote /.mergify.yml
```
Updated with template-control on 2019-02-01T10:40:33.775Z
/.mergify.yml:
wrote /.mergify.yml
```
|
This PR was originally sent to 2.6.x, but default branch is now 2.7.x. We should cherrypick it on 2.7.x once merged. |
|
CLA signed, but check didn't capture it. |
|
@renatocaval Is something missing from my end? |
|
@satendrakumar, no it's not. We just didn't have yet the opportunity to review and merge it. :-) Thanks a lot for your contribution. |
marcospereira
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looking good to me. Thank you, @satendrakumar.
| @@ -0,0 +1,5 @@ | |||
| include "application.conf" | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does not looks necessary since it is using basically the same values in application.conf.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Or is this here to demonstrate how to have a distinct configuration for tests? If so, then I think it could be a good idea to also add a comment explaining it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@marcospereira The reason for including an application.conf some configurations are common for all environments.
Generally application.conf we used for dev environment. For running unit test we have to change some configurations(for eg: database credentials ) and some reuse from the application.conf.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@satendrakumar, yep, we all agree that's a good thing to do. I think Marcos point is that if we are using that sample to also educate people on how to tweak configurations for different environments, then it's better to leave a small comment explaining the technique.
|
|
||
| libraryDependencies += specs2 % Test | ||
|
|
||
| javaOptions in Test += "-Dconfig.file=conf/test.conf" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If test.conf is not necessary, we must also remove this line.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@marcospereira yes, You are right. It is not necessary.
For new users, it is easy to have this. They will keep all test configuration in test.conf. If they are using sbt test all the configuration will come from test.conf.
|
Closing and re-opening to see if the CLA bot will get it. |
…ork#92) /.mergify.yml: wrote /.mergify.yml
No description provided.