Use more specific assertions for 'in' checks.

Review Request #6064 — Created July 4, 2014 and submitted — Latest diff uploaded

Information

Review Board
release-2.0.x
3797c0d...

Reviewers

A lot of old code used assertTrue(blah in blah), or variants on that,
which didn't tell you much if there was a failure. Nowadays, we have
assertIn and assertNotIn, which we can use instead. This switches our
tests to use these.

Unit tests pass.

reviewboard/changedescs/tests.py
reviewboard/diffviewer/tests.py
reviewboard/extensions/tests.py
reviewboard/hostingsvcs/tests.py
reviewboard/reviews/tests.py
reviewboard/scmtools/tests.py
reviewboard/webapi/tests/base.py
reviewboard/webapi/tests/mixins.py
reviewboard/webapi/tests/mixins_comment.py
reviewboard/webapi/tests/test_change.py
reviewboard/webapi/tests/test_default_reviewer.py
reviewboard/webapi/tests/test_diff.py
reviewboard/webapi/tests/test_diff_file_attachment.py
reviewboard/webapi/tests/test_draft_diff.py
reviewboard/webapi/tests/test_draft_filediff.py
reviewboard/webapi/tests/test_file_attachment_draft.py
reviewboard/webapi/tests/test_repository.py
reviewboard/webapi/tests/test_review_comment.py
reviewboard/webapi/tests/test_review_reply.py
reviewboard/webapi/tests/test_review_request.py
reviewboard/webapi/tests/test_review_screenshot_comment.py
reviewboard/webapi/tests/test_root.py
reviewboard/webapi/tests/test_server_info.py
reviewboard/webapi/tests/test_session.py
reviewboard/webapi/tests/test_user.py
reviewboard/webapi/tests/test_validate_diff.py
reviewboard/webapi/tests/test_watched_review_group.py
Loading...