----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/66784/#review201902 -----------------------------------------------------------
omrs/src/test/java/org/apache/atlas/omrs/archivemanager/opentypes/TestOpenMetadataTypesArchive.java Lines 35 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/66784/#comment283522> This code is not in the most effective place. It only ensures the open metadata types do not have duplicate attributes for an entity and only after the archive is built. It should be in the archive builder ensuring that no archives can be built with duplicate names. It should also be in the repository content manager validating that types from different archives do not cause an entity to have duplicate properties. This test code should be removed and reformatted to run in the main OMRS code. - Mandy Chessell On April 24, 2018, 8:48 p.m., David Radley wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/66784/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated April 24, 2018, 8:48 p.m.) > > > Review request for atlas, Madhan Neethiraj and Mandy Chessell. > > > Bugs: ATLAS2604 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ATLAS2604 > > > Repository: atlas > > > Description > ------- > > ATLAS2604 Minor fixups to open metadata archive types to avoid duplicate > attributes due to relationship end names. > > > Diffs > ----- > > > omrs/src/main/java/org/apache/atlas/omrs/archivemanager/opentypes/OpenMetadataTypesArchive.java > faab96cac > > omrs/src/test/java/org/apache/atlas/omrs/archivemanager/opentypes/TestOpenMetadataTypesArchive.java > PRE-CREATION > > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/66784/diff/1/ > > > Testing > ------- > > Ran junit that failed without the patch applied. I ran this in Intellij using > the Maven view to run the test phase on the OMRS module. This successfully > ran the test. > > > Thanks, > > David Radley > >
