test: Improved test coverage in #31
Conversation
WalkthroughThe pull request modifies the Changes
Possibly related PRs
Suggested reviewers
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #31 +/- ##
============================================
- Coverage 42.53% 36.47% -6.06%
============================================
Files 53 67 +14
Lines 964 1124 +160
Branches 76 90 +14
============================================
Hits 410 410
- Misses 517 677 +160
Partials 37 37
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 6
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (4)
kinde-management/src/main/java/com/kinde/admin/KindeAdminSessionImpl.java (2)
Line range hint
1-52: Document new behavior and consider design improvementsThe changes introduce a new behavior when
kindeClientis null, but this is not documented or explained in the class. This could lead to unexpected behavior for users of this class. Consider the following improvements:
Add documentation to the class and the
initClient()method explaining the behavior whenkindeClientis null.Reconsider the class design to handle a null
kindeClientmore explicitly. For example:a. Make
kindeClientnon-nullable in the constructor and provide a separate factory method for creating an instance with default authentication:public class KindeAdminSessionImpl implements KindeAdminSession { private final KindeClient kindeClient; public KindeAdminSessionImpl(KindeClient kindeClient) { this.kindeClient = Objects.requireNonNull(kindeClient, "kindeClient must not be null"); } public static KindeAdminSessionImpl createWithDefaultAuth(Config config) { // Create and return an instance with default authentication } // ... }b. Or, if null
kindeClientis a valid use case, make it explicit in the constructor and document it:public class KindeAdminSessionImpl implements KindeAdminSession { private final KindeClient kindeClient; private final Config config; /** * @param kindeClient The KindeClient to use, or null to use default authentication * @param config The configuration to use for default authentication when kindeClient is null */ public KindeAdminSessionImpl(KindeClient kindeClient, Config config) { this.kindeClient = kindeClient; this.config = Objects.requireNonNull(config, "config must not be null"); } // ... }These changes would make the class's behavior more explicit and easier to understand for developers using this class.
Line range hint
1-52: Minor improvements for code quality and robustnessHere are a few minor suggestions to improve the overall quality and robustness of the code:
- Consider using constructor injection consistently. Instead of setting
kindeClientin the constructor and creating other dependencies in theinitClient()method, you could inject all necessary dependencies:public class KindeAdminSessionImpl implements KindeAdminSession { private final KindeClient kindeClient; private final Config config; public KindeAdminSessionImpl(KindeClient kindeClient, Config config) { this.kindeClient = kindeClient; this.config = Objects.requireNonNull(config, "config must not be null"); } // ... }
- Add a null check for
kindeTokens.getAccessToken()to make the code more robust:KindeTokens kindeTokens = kindeClient.clientSession().retrieveTokens(); if (kindeTokens == null || kindeTokens.getAccessToken() == null) { throw new IllegalStateException("Invalid session type or missing access token."); } AccessToken accessToken = kindeTokens.getAccessToken();
- Consider using
finalfor variables that are not reassigned to make the code's intent clearer:final Map<String, Authentication> authMap = new HashMap<>(); final ApiClient apiClient = new ApiClient(authMap);These changes would further improve the code quality and make it more robust against potential null pointer exceptions.
kinde-management/src/test/java/com/kinde/admin/KindeAdminSessionImplTest.java (2)
26-30: Add assertion for ApiClient result.The test creates a
KindeAdminSessionImplinstance with a null parameter and callsinitClient(), but it doesn't verify the result. Consider adding an assertion to ensure that the returnedApiClientis not null or has expected properties.Example assertion:
assertNotNull(apiClient, "ApiClient should not be null");
31-46: LGTM: Comprehensive mocking setup with a minor suggestion.The mocking setup is thorough and covers all necessary dependencies for the test. The use of
JwtGeneratorfor creating mock tokens is a good practice.To improve readability, consider extracting the mock setup into a separate method, e.g.,
setupMocks(). This would make the test method more concise and easier to understand.Example refactoring:
private void setupMocks(KindeClient kindeClient) throws Exception { KindeClientSession kindeClientSession = Mockito.mock(KindeClientSession.class); when(kindeClient.clientSession()).thenReturn(kindeClientSession); // ... (rest of the mock setup) } @Test public void testInitClient() throws Exception { // ... (first part of the test) KindeClient kindeClient = Mockito.mock(KindeClient.class); setupMocks(kindeClient); // ... (rest of the test) }
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
kinde-management/pom.xmlis excluded by!**/*.xml
📒 Files selected for processing (3)
- kinde-management/src/main/java/com/kinde/admin/KindeAdminSessionImpl.java (1 hunks)
- kinde-management/src/test/java/com/kinde/admin/KindeAdminSessionImplTest.java (1 hunks)
- kinde-management/src/test/java/com/kinde/token/jwt/JwtGenerator.java (1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Learnings (1)
kinde-management/src/test/java/com/kinde/token/jwt/JwtGenerator.java (2)
Learnt from: brettchaldecott PR: kinde-oss/kinde-java-sdk#21 File: kinde-core/src/test/java/com/kinde/token/jwt/JwtGenerator.java:82-110 Timestamp: 2024-08-19T09:42:12.291Z Learning: Hardcoded claims and key IDs in the `refreshToken` method are acceptable for testing purposes.Learnt from: brettchaldecott PR: kinde-oss/kinde-java-sdk#21 File: kinde-core/src/test/java/com/kinde/token/jwt/JwtGenerator.java:19-48 Timestamp: 2024-08-19T09:41:56.859Z Learning: The `generateAccessToken` method in `JwtGenerator` is used for testing purposes, and hardcoded values are acceptable in this context.
🔇 Additional comments (2)
kinde-management/src/test/java/com/kinde/admin/KindeAdminSessionImplTest.java (1)
1-23: LGTM: Import statements are appropriate and concise.The import statements cover all necessary classes for the test implementation, including Kinde SDK components, Nimbus JOSE + JWT library for OIDC-related classes, and testing frameworks (JUnit and Mockito).
kinde-management/src/test/java/com/kinde/token/jwt/JwtGenerator.java (1)
1-117: Overall implementation is appropriate for testing purposesThe
JwtGeneratorclass effectively generates JWT tokens needed for testing, and hardcoded values are acceptable in this context, as per the retrieved learnings. The use of@SneakyThrowssimplifies exception handling in test code, which is also acceptable.I utilized the context from the retrieved learnings to confirm that hardcoded values are permissible in this testing scenario.
| Map<String, Authentication> authMap = new HashMap<>(); | ||
| authMap.put("ManagementAPI",new OAuth( | ||
| "https://kinde.com","http://kinde.com/oauth2/token")); | ||
| return new ApiClient(authMap); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
Hardcoded URLs Identified in Multiple Locations
The review has uncovered that hardcoded URLs "https://kinde.com" and "http://kinde.com/oauth2/token" are present in several Java files, including both main and test directories. This widespread use of hardcoded authentication endpoints poses the following concerns:
- Maintainability: Updating the URLs requires changes in multiple files, increasing the risk of inconsistencies and errors.
- Flexibility: Different environments (development, staging, production) may require different URLs, which is not feasible with hardcoded values.
- Security: Hardcoded URLs can be a vector for security vulnerabilities if they need to be updated or if unauthorized changes occur.
Recommendations:
-
Centralize Configuration: Refactor the code to use configuration files or environment variables for authentication URLs.
String domain = config.getKindeDomain(); String tokenEndpoint = config.getKindeTokenEndpoint(); authMap.put("ManagementAPI", new OAuth(domain, tokenEndpoint));
-
Implement Validation and Error Handling: Ensure that configurations are loaded correctly and handle scenarios where configurations might be missing or incorrect.
if (kindeClient == null) { logger.warn("KindeClient is null. Using default authentication."); try { Map<String, Authentication> authMap = new HashMap<>(); authMap.put("ManagementAPI", new OAuth(domain, tokenEndpoint)); return new ApiClient(authMap); } catch (Exception e) { logger.error("Failed to initialize default ApiClient", e); throw new IllegalStateException("Unable to initialize ApiClient", e); } }
-
Review All Instances: Conduct a comprehensive review of all occurrences of these hardcoded URLs and apply the refactoring consistently across the codebase.
🔗 Analysis chain
Avoid using hardcoded URLs and improve error handling
While the addition of a default authentication mechanism when kindeClient is null is a good idea, there are several concerns with the current implementation:
-
Hardcoded URLs: The URLs "https://kinde.com" and "http://kinde.com/oauth2/token" are hardcoded. This reduces flexibility and may cause issues if these URLs change or differ across environments.
-
Lack of error handling: There's no error handling or logging for this new code path, which could make debugging difficult if issues arise.
-
Security implications: Using hardcoded authentication endpoints could pose a security risk if these URLs change or if different environments require different URLs.
-
Maintainability: Hardcoded values reduce maintainability and make it harder to update the code for different environments or configurations.
To address these concerns, consider the following improvements:
- Use configuration values instead of hardcoded URLs:
String domain = config.getKindeDomain();
String tokenEndpoint = config.getKindeTokenEndpoint();
authMap.put("ManagementAPI", new OAuth(domain, tokenEndpoint));- Add error handling and logging:
if (kindeClient == null) {
logger.warn("KindeClient is null. Using default authentication.");
try {
Map<String, Authentication> authMap = new HashMap<>();
authMap.put("ManagementAPI", new OAuth(domain, tokenEndpoint));
return new ApiClient(authMap);
} catch (Exception e) {
logger.error("Failed to initialize default ApiClient", e);
throw new IllegalStateException("Unable to initialize ApiClient", e);
}
}- Consider adding a comment explaining why this default authentication is necessary when
kindeClientis null.
To ensure these URLs are not used elsewhere in the codebase, you can run the following command:
This will help identify if these hardcoded URLs are used in other parts of the codebase, which might also need to be updated.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
rg --type java "https://kinde.com" "http://kinde.com/oauth2/token"
Length of output: 134
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Corrected command to search for hardcoded URLs in Java files
rg --type java -e "https://kinde.com" -e "http://kinde.com/oauth2/token"
Length of output: 3628
| public class KindeAdminSessionImplTest { | ||
|
|
||
| @Test | ||
| public void testInitClient() throws Exception { | ||
| KindeAdminSessionImpl kindeAdminSession1 = new KindeAdminSessionImpl(null); | ||
| ApiClient apiClient = kindeAdminSession1.initClient(); | ||
|
|
||
| KindeClient kindeClient = Mockito.mock(KindeClient.class); | ||
| KindeClientSession kindeClientSession = Mockito.mock(KindeClientSession.class); | ||
| when(kindeClient.clientSession()).thenReturn(kindeClientSession); | ||
| KindeConfig kindeConfig = Mockito.mock(KindeConfig.class); | ||
| when(kindeClient.kindeConfig()).thenReturn(kindeConfig); | ||
| OidcMetaData oidcMetaData = Mockito.mock(OidcMetaData.class); | ||
| when(kindeClient.oidcMetaData()).thenReturn(oidcMetaData); | ||
| OIDCProviderMetadata oidcProviderMetadata = new OIDCProviderMetadata(new Issuer("https://kinde.com"), | ||
| Arrays.asList(SubjectType.PUBLIC), new URI("https://kinde.com")); | ||
| oidcProviderMetadata.setTokenEndpointURI(new URI("https://kinde.com")); | ||
| when(oidcMetaData.getOpMetadata()).thenReturn(oidcProviderMetadata); | ||
| IDToken idToken = IDToken.init(JwtGenerator.generateIDToken(),true); | ||
| AccessToken accessToken = AccessToken.init(JwtGenerator.generateAccessToken(),true); | ||
| RefreshToken refreshToken = RefreshToken.init(JwtGenerator.refreshToken(),true); | ||
| KindeTokens kindeTokens = new KindeTokens(Arrays.asList(),idToken,accessToken,refreshToken); | ||
| when(kindeClientSession.retrieveTokens()).thenReturn(kindeTokens); | ||
| KindeAdminSessionImpl kindeAdminSession2 = new KindeAdminSessionImpl(kindeClient); | ||
| kindeAdminSession2.initClient(); | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Good start, but expand test coverage and add assertions.
The test class provides a good foundation for testing the KindeAdminSessionImpl.initClient() method. However, to improve the overall test coverage and reliability, consider the following suggestions:
- Add assertions to verify the expected behavior in both scenarios (null and mocked KindeClient).
- Include error scenarios and edge cases, such as:
- KindeClient throwing exceptions
- Invalid or expired tokens
- Network errors during client initialization
- Test different configuration scenarios (e.g., different OIDC provider metadata).
- Consider using parameterized tests for testing multiple scenarios efficiently.
Example additional test case:
@Test
public void testInitClientWithException() {
KindeClient mockClient = Mockito.mock(KindeClient.class);
when(mockClient.clientSession()).thenThrow(new RuntimeException("Session error"));
KindeAdminSessionImpl kindeAdminSession = new KindeAdminSessionImpl(mockClient);
assertThrows(RuntimeException.class, () -> kindeAdminSession.initClient(),
"initClient should throw RuntimeException when client session fails");
}| KindeAdminSessionImpl kindeAdminSession2 = new KindeAdminSessionImpl(kindeClient); | ||
| kindeAdminSession2.initClient(); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Enhance test assertions and scenario verification.
The test creates two KindeAdminSessionImpl instances (one with null and one with a mocked KindeClient) but doesn't verify the behavior difference or assert the results. Consider the following improvements:
- Add assertions to verify the behavior of
initClient()with the mockedKindeClient. - Compare the results of both
initClient()calls to ensure they behave differently as expected. - Verify that the mocked methods were called as expected.
Example improvements:
ApiClient apiClient1 = kindeAdminSession1.initClient();
assertNotNull(apiClient1, "ApiClient should not be null for null KindeClient");
KindeAdminSessionImpl kindeAdminSession2 = new KindeAdminSessionImpl(kindeClient);
ApiClient apiClient2 = kindeAdminSession2.initClient();
assertNotNull(apiClient2, "ApiClient should not be null for mocked KindeClient");
// Verify that the mocked methods were called
Mockito.verify(kindeClient).clientSession();
Mockito.verify(kindeClient).kindeConfig();
Mockito.verify(kindeClient).oidcMetaData();
Mockito.verify(kindeClientSession).retrieveTokens();
// Compare the two ApiClient instances if they should be different
assertNotEquals(apiClient1, apiClient2, "ApiClient instances should be different for null and mocked KindeClient");| RSAKey rsaJWK = new RSAKeyGenerator(2048) | ||
| .keyID("123") | ||
| .generate(); | ||
| RSAKey rsaPublicJWK = rsaJWK.toPublicJWK(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Remove unused variable rsaPublicJWK
The variable rsaPublicJWK declared in methods generateAccessToken (line 23), generateIDToken (line 54), and refreshToken (line 93) is never used in the code. Removing this unused variable will clean up the code and eliminate any potential confusion.
Apply this diff to remove the unused variable:
- RSAKey rsaPublicJWK = rsaJWK.toPublicJWK();Also applies to: 54-54, 93-93
| public static String generateAccessToken() { | ||
|
|
||
| // generate a new signed token | ||
| RSAKey rsaJWK = new RSAKeyGenerator(2048) | ||
| .keyID("123") | ||
| .generate(); | ||
| RSAKey rsaPublicJWK = rsaJWK.toPublicJWK(); | ||
|
|
||
| JWSSigner signer = new RSASSASigner(rsaJWK); | ||
|
|
||
| Date now = new Date(); | ||
|
|
||
| JWTClaimsSet jwtClaims = new JWTClaimsSet.Builder() | ||
| .issuer("https://openid.net") | ||
| .subject("test") | ||
| .audience(Arrays.asList("https://kinde.com")) | ||
| .expirationTime(new Date(now.getTime() + 1000*60*10)) // expires in 10 minutes | ||
| .notBeforeTime(now) | ||
| .issueTime(now) | ||
| .claim("permissions",Arrays.asList("test1","test1")) | ||
| .jwtID(UUID.randomUUID().toString()) | ||
| .build(); | ||
|
|
||
| SignedJWT signedJWT = new SignedJWT( | ||
| new JWSHeader.Builder(JWSAlgorithm.RS256).keyID(rsaJWK.getKeyID()).build(), | ||
| jwtClaims); | ||
|
|
||
| signedJWT.sign(signer); | ||
| return signedJWT.serialize(); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Refactor common code to reduce duplication
The methods generateAccessToken, generateIDToken, and refreshToken share significant portions of code, such as RSA key generation, signer initialization, and claim setup. Consider refactoring the common code into private helper methods or a constructor to enhance maintainability and reduce duplication.
For example, you can create a private method to generate the RSA key and signer:
@SneakyThrows
private static RSASSASigner getSigner() {
RSAKey rsaJWK = new RSAKeyGenerator(2048)
.keyID("123")
.generate();
return new RSASSASigner(rsaJWK);
}And another private method to build the common JWT claims:
private static JWTClaimsSet.Builder getCommonClaims(Date now) {
return new JWTClaimsSet.Builder()
.issuer("https://openid.net")
.subject("test")
.audience(Collections.singletonList("https://kinde.com"))
.expirationTime(new Date(now.getTime() + 1000 * 60 * 10)) // expires in 10 minutes
.notBeforeTime(now)
.issueTime(now)
.claim("permissions", Arrays.asList("test1", "test1"))
.jwtID(UUID.randomUUID().toString());
}This refactoring will make your test code cleaner and more manageable.
Also applies to: 49-85, 88-116
| RSAKey rsaJWK = new RSAKeyGenerator(2048) | ||
| .keyID("123") | ||
| .generate(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Reuse RSA key instead of generating a new one in each method
Currently, each method generates a new RSA key pair every time it's called. This can be inefficient and unnecessary for testing purposes. Consider generating the RSA key once and reusing it across all methods to improve efficiency.
For example, you can declare the RSA key as a static variable:
private static final RSAKey RSA_JWK = new RSAKeyGenerator(2048)
.keyID("123")
.generate();
private static final JWSSigner SIGNER = new RSASSASigner(RSA_JWK);Then, use SIGNER in your methods without generating new keys each time.
Also applies to: 51-53, 90-92
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (3)
kinde-springboot/kinde-springboot-core/src/test/java/com/kinde/spring/config/KindeOAuth2PropertiesTest.java (3)
8-13: LGTM: Test class and method setup are well-structured.The class and method names follow proper conventions, and the use of Mockito for
OAuth2ClientPropertiesis appropriate for unit testing.Consider adding a brief JavaDoc comment for the test method to describe its purpose and what aspects of
KindeOAuth2Propertiesit's testing. This would improve the test's documentation and make it easier for other developers to understand the test's intent.
15-25: LGTM: Comprehensive checks for default values.The test thoroughly verifies the initial state of
KindeOAuth2Properties, including null checks for most properties and specific checks foraudienceandpermissionsClaim.Consider grouping related assertions together and adding comments to separate different groups of checks. This would improve the readability of the test. For example:
// Check that most properties are initially null Assert.assertNull(kindeOAuth2Properties.getRedirectUri()); // ... (other null checks) // Check default values for non-null properties Assert.assertEquals("api://default", kindeOAuth2Properties.getAudience()); Assert.assertNotNull(kindeOAuth2Properties.getPermissionsClaim());
27-40: LGTM: Setter methods are thoroughly tested.The test covers all important setter methods and verifies that the set values can be correctly retrieved.
Consider the following improvements to enhance the test:
- Test edge cases: Add tests for empty strings or special characters in the set values.
- Use constants: Define test values as constants at the class level for better maintainability.
- Test remaining setters: Add tests for
setAuthorizationGrantType(),setPostLogoutRedirectUri(),setProxy(), andsetScopes()to ensure complete coverage.Example of using constants:
private static final String TEST_URI = "https://kinde.com"; private static final String TEST_CLIENT_ID = "client-id"; // ... other constants @Test public void testKindeOAuth2Properties() { // ... existing setup code kindeOAuth2Properties.setRedirectUri(TEST_URI); Assert.assertEquals(TEST_URI, kindeOAuth2Properties.getRedirectUri()); // ... other tests using constants }
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
kinde-management/pom.xmlis excluded by!**/*.xml
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
- kinde-springboot/kinde-springboot-core/src/test/java/com/kinde/spring/config/KindeOAuth2PropertiesTest.java (1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🔇 Additional comments (1)
kinde-springboot/kinde-springboot-core/src/test/java/com/kinde/spring/config/KindeOAuth2PropertiesTest.java (1)
1-7: LGTM: Package declaration and imports are correct.The package declaration is consistent with the file path, and all necessary imports are present without any unused ones.
| package com.kinde.spring.config; | ||
|
|
||
| import org.junit.Assert; | ||
| import org.junit.jupiter.api.Test; | ||
| import org.mockito.Mockito; | ||
| import org.springframework.boot.autoconfigure.security.oauth2.client.OAuth2ClientProperties; | ||
|
|
||
| public class KindeOAuth2PropertiesTest { | ||
|
|
||
| @Test | ||
| public void testKindeOAuth2Properties() { | ||
| OAuth2ClientProperties clientProperties = Mockito.mock(OAuth2ClientProperties.class); | ||
| KindeOAuth2Properties kindeOAuth2Properties = new KindeOAuth2Properties(clientProperties); | ||
|
|
||
| Assert.assertNull(kindeOAuth2Properties.getRedirectUri()); | ||
| Assert.assertNull(kindeOAuth2Properties.getClientId()); | ||
| Assert.assertNull(kindeOAuth2Properties.getClientSecret()); | ||
| Assert.assertNull(kindeOAuth2Properties.getAuthorizationGrantType()); | ||
| Assert.assertNull(kindeOAuth2Properties.getDomain()); | ||
| Assert.assertEquals("api://default",kindeOAuth2Properties.getAudience()); | ||
| Assert.assertNull(kindeOAuth2Properties.getPostLogoutRedirectUri()); | ||
| Assert.assertNull(kindeOAuth2Properties.getProxy()); | ||
| Assert.assertNull(kindeOAuth2Properties.getScopes()); | ||
|
|
||
| Assert.assertNotNull(kindeOAuth2Properties.getPermissionsClaim()); | ||
|
|
||
| kindeOAuth2Properties.setRedirectUri("https://kinde.com"); | ||
| Assert.assertEquals("https://kinde.com",kindeOAuth2Properties.getRedirectUri()); | ||
|
|
||
| kindeOAuth2Properties.setClientId("client-id"); | ||
| Assert.assertEquals("client-id",kindeOAuth2Properties.getClientId()); | ||
|
|
||
| kindeOAuth2Properties.setClientSecret("client-secret"); | ||
| Assert.assertEquals("client-secret",kindeOAuth2Properties.getClientSecret()); | ||
|
|
||
| kindeOAuth2Properties.setDomain("https://kinde.com"); | ||
| Assert.assertEquals("https://kinde.com",kindeOAuth2Properties.getDomain()); | ||
|
|
||
| kindeOAuth2Properties.setAudience("https://kinde.com/api"); | ||
| Assert.assertEquals("https://kinde.com/api",kindeOAuth2Properties.getAudience()); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Good start on testing, but room for improvement in coverage and structure.
The test provides a solid foundation for verifying the basic functionality of KindeOAuth2Properties. However, there are several areas where the test can be enhanced:
-
Comprehensive coverage: Add tests for all setter methods and properties, including those currently not covered (e.g.,
setScopes(),setProxy()). -
Edge case testing: Include tests for potential error cases and invalid inputs to ensure robust behavior.
-
Test organization: Consider breaking down the single large test method into multiple smaller, focused test methods. This improves readability and makes it easier to identify which specific functionality has failed when a test doesn't pass.
-
Use of test fixtures: Implement
@BeforeEachto set up common test objects, reducing code duplication. -
Parameterized tests: For properties that accept various inputs, consider using JUnit's parameterized tests to cover multiple scenarios efficiently.
Here's an example of how you might restructure the tests:
public class KindeOAuth2PropertiesTest {
private OAuth2ClientProperties clientProperties;
private KindeOAuth2Properties kindeOAuth2Properties;
@BeforeEach
void setUp() {
clientProperties = Mockito.mock(OAuth2ClientProperties.class);
kindeOAuth2Properties = new KindeOAuth2Properties(clientProperties);
}
@Test
void testDefaultValues() {
// Test all properties for their default values
}
@Test
void testSetterMethods() {
// Test all setter methods
}
@ParameterizedTest
@ValueSource(strings = {"https://kinde.com", "", "invalid-uri"})
void testSetRedirectUri(String uri) {
kindeOAuth2Properties.setRedirectUri(uri);
assertEquals(uri, kindeOAuth2Properties.getRedirectUri());
}
// Additional test methods for other properties and edge cases
}This structure would provide more comprehensive and organized testing for the KindeOAuth2Properties class.
|
This has been replaced with another pr. |
Explain your changes
Working on improving test coverage
Checklist
🛟 If you need help, consider asking for advice over in the Kinde community.