[AIRFLOW-6720] Detect missing tests for providers package

[mik-laj]

During the introduction of AIP-21, I corrected the test file names. Very often the file name in the application did not match the test file name. Now I would like to prevent regression, so I add tests that detect typos in names. This will also force you to add tests.

This is an experiment that we can extend to other packages in the project in the future.

CC: @coopergillan

---

Issue link: AIRFLOW-6720

Make sure to mark the boxes below before creating PR: [x]

• Description above provides context of the change
• Commit message/PR title starts with [AIRFLOW-NNNN]. AIRFLOW-NNNN = JIRA ID^*
• Unit tests coverage for changes (not needed for documentation changes)
• Commits follow "How to write a good git commit message"
• Relevant documentation is updated including usage instructions.
• I will engage committers as explained in Contribution Workflow Example.

^* For document-only changes commit message can start with [AIRFLOW-XXXX].

---

In case of fundamental code change, Airflow Improvement Proposal (AIP) is needed.
In case of a new dependency, check compliance with the ASF 3rd Party License Policy.
In case of backwards incompatible changes please leave a note in UPDATING.md.
Read the Pull Request Guidelines for more information.

[codecov-io]

Codecov Report

Merging #7346 into master will decrease coverage by 0.23%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #7346      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage    86.1%   85.86%   -0.24%     
==========================================
  Files         871      871              
  Lines       40574    40574              
==========================================
- Hits        34935    34839      -96     
- Misses       5639     5735      +96

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
airflow/kubernetes/volume_mount.py	44.44% <0%> (-55.56%)	⬇️
airflow/kubernetes/volume.py	52.94% <0%> (-47.06%)	⬇️
airflow/kubernetes/pod_launcher.py	45.25% <0%> (-46.72%)	⬇️
airflow/executors/celery_executor.py	50.67% <0%> (-37.84%)	⬇️
airflow/kubernetes/refresh_config.py	50.98% <0%> (-23.53%)	⬇️
...viders/cncf/kubernetes/operators/kubernetes_pod.py	76.47% <0%> (-21.18%)	⬇️
airflow/executors/base_executor.py	93.58% <0%> (-2.57%)	⬇️
airflow/jobs/scheduler_job.py	89.34% <0%> (+0.14%)	⬆️
airflow/utils/dag_processing.py	88.5% <0%> (+0.38%)	⬆️
airflow/hooks/dbapi_hook.py	91.73% <0%> (+0.82%)	⬆️
... and 4 more

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update d9fc5be...04cc228. Read the comment docs.

[potiuk]

Nice. I think it's a good step. I'd like others to chime in - but it looks like an interesting approach.

[turbaszek]

I think missing_tests_files <= MISSING_TEST_FILES is the proper condition, as missing_tests_files can be subset of MISSING_TEST_FILES. In case someone added a missing test this test should pass and test_keep_missing_test_files_update should fail. Otherwise, we are testing the same thing two times.

[potiuk]

I think it's good with equals. The goal is - similar as with pylint_todo.txt to go with this list to empty. So when someone adds test file, the test will fail and it will be the right time for the person who adds this file to remove it from the list.

[turbaszek]

I agree but we have two tests. One that checks missing files (this one) and second one that checks if someone adjusted the MISSING_TEST_FILES.

[mik-laj]

Thanks you. Updated.

[potiuk]

Indeed. that's nicer now!

[coopergillan]

Noted on the cc - picked up a couple of these over in #7468.