Skip to content

Refine az_validate_uuid_pattern API #22741

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

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

Conversation

mpagot
Copy link
Contributor

@mpagot mpagot commented Jul 22, 2025

Refine two azure_cli API: az_validate_uuid_pattern and az_storage_lease_acquire by defining some additional unit tests and improving the documentation.

  • Ticket TEAM-10465 - [SDAF] Fix network space assignment logic

Verification

@mpagot mpagot force-pushed the az_validate_uuid_pattern_ut branch from bfa8079 to e32d0cf Compare July 22, 2025 15:39
mpagot added 2 commits July 22, 2025 17:57
Refine two azure_cli API: az_validate_uuid_pattern and az_storage_lease_acquire
by defining some additional unit tests and improving the documentation.
Fix all the API caller both in SDAF and QESAP lib.
@mpagot mpagot force-pushed the az_validate_uuid_pattern_ut branch from e32d0cf to 97287e6 Compare July 22, 2025 15:58
@mpagot mpagot marked this pull request as ready for review July 22, 2025 16:28
@@ -1530,10 +1544,10 @@ sub az_resource_list {
sub az_validate_uuid_pattern {
my (%args) = @_;
croak "Mandatory argument 'uuid' missing" unless $args{uuid};
my $pattern = '[0-9a-f]{8}-[0-9a-f]{4}-[0-9a-f]{4}-[0-9a-f]{4}-[0-9a-f]{12}';
my $pattern = '^[0-9a-f]{8}-[0-9a-f]{4}-[0-9a-f]{4}-[0-9a-f]{4}-[0-9a-f]{12}$';
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Good finding. 💯

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I will remove the related code changes after your PR merged.

Copy link
Contributor

@lilyeyes lilyeyes left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I did not review the UT, but other code changes are LGTM.

@lilyeyes
Copy link
Contributor

There is a failure in http://openqaworker15.qa.suse.cz/tests/333692#step/configure/258 but it seems not related to this PR.

@mpagot
Copy link
Contributor Author

mpagot commented Jul 23, 2025

There is a failure in http://openqaworker15.qa.suse.cz/tests/333692#step/configure/258 but it seems not related to this PR.

Exactly. And that one does not result in the test to fail. Test fails in terraform -d at the very end https://openqaworker15.qa.suse.cz/tests/333692#step/destroy/52 that is not related to the change in this PR.

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.

2 participants