[schlessera]

Some scenarios in config-get-field.feature and config-backcompat.feature expected the test database to be called wp_cli_test. That only holds with the default WP_CLI_TEST_DBNAME, and not when running the tests in parallel workers, which each use their own database (wp-cli/wp-cli-tests#405). They now expect {DB_NAME}.

With WP_CLI_TEST_DBNAME=wp_cli_test_7, 6 of these 26 scenarios fail on main and all pass with this change. Found through #237.

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Tests
  • Updated configuration retrieval checks to expect the configured database name rather than a fixed value. Coverage now reflects this behavior for constant lookups, default and custom configuration files, and plain, JSON, and YAML output formats.

[coderabbitai]

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review.

Recent review info

Run configuration

• Source mode: Auto
• Repository: Unavailable
• Branch: Unavailable
• File: No configuration file from this repository applied
• Commit: Unavailable
• Layers: defaults
• Review profile: CHILL
• Plan: Advanced
• Run ID: ea282461-741f-420b-a224-2f4e11eaa995

Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 4d50cec and 91fd0ec.

Files selected for processing: 2

• features/config-backcompat.feature
• features/config-get-field.feature

Included review availability: This review used your included allowance. Your plan provides up to 1 included review per hour; 0 remain after this review.

Walkthrough

The config-get feature expectations now use {DB_NAME} instead of the literal wp_cli_test for constant lookups, including plain, JSON, and YAML output.

Changes: Config-get expectations

Layer / File(s)	Summary
DB_NAME output expectations features/config-backcompat.feature, features/config-get-field.feature	Back-compatibility, default-config, and custom-config scenarios expect {DB_NAME} for DB_NAME constant lookups, including plain, JSON, and YAML output.

Estimated code review effort: 1 (Trivial) | ~4 minutes

Change: Bug fix

Suggested reviewers: swissspidy

Merge Risk: Minimal · up to 91fd0

The test expectations now support customized database names and are ready to merge.

Pre-merge checks: 5

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check		Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check		The title clearly and concisely describes the main change: updating test expectations to use the configured database name.
Docstring Coverage		No eligible functions found in the changed files. Skipping docstring coverage check. Docstring coverage is scoped to functions touched by this diff with cyclomatic complexity of at least 2. Documentat…
Linked Issues check		Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check		Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.

Full details: Docstring Coverage

Explanation

No eligible functions found in the changed files. Skipping docstring coverage check. Docstring coverage is scoped to functions touched by this diff with cyclomatic complexity of at least 2. Documentation-only edits and deletions within surviving functions are included; unchanged diff context and fully deleted functions are excluded. Analyzed 0 functions across 0 files. (2 skipped: 2 unsupported.)

Finishing Touches

Generate unit tests (beta)

• Commit to this branch
• Create a new PR

• Autofix · Keep fixing CodeRabbit findings and required CI, and resolving merge conflicts

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.

📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know!