feat!: remove feature cim-field-report generation

[dvarasani-crest]

This PR removes the feature of generating cim-field-report.
ref: ADDON-73385

NOTE:

• moved unit test file (test_report.py) of cim-compliance report generation test from test_tools folder to test_utilities

[kdoroszko-splunk]

What is the reason of moving from tests/unit/tests_standard_lib/test_tools/test_cim_report.py to tests/unit/tests_standard_lib/test_utilities/test_cim_report.py? I can see that tests structure mimics structure of submodules: https://github.com/splunk/pytest-splunk-addon/tree/main/pytest_splunk_addon.

[dvarasani-crest]

@kdoroszko-splunk I have moved that test file to actually align that with the submodules. test_report.py tests for cim-report generation which is for function generate_report of standard_lib/utilities/junit_parser.py::generate_report().

[kdoroszko-splunk]

@kdoroszko-splunk I have moved that test file to actually align that with the submodules. test_report.py tests for cim-report generation which is for function generate_report of standard_lib/utilities/junit_parser.py::generate_report().

Right, thanks for clarifying.

[mkolasinski-splunk]

@dvarasani-crest is ! sign in PR title intentional?
Consider changing base branch to release/v5.4.0

Beside above, LGTM!

[dvarasani-crest]

@dvarasani-crest is ! sign in PR title intentional? Consider changing base branch to release/v5.4.0

Beside above, LGTM!

@mkolasinski-splunk I have added ! to indicate this PR as a breaking change. Also, since this PR contains a BREAKING change commit, do you still think we need to rebase it to release/5.4.0? because merging this commit to release/5.4.0 would lead to release v6.0.0 when we merge release/5.4.0 to main.
Let me know if we do not want to consider this as a BREAKING change.

[mkolasinski-splunk]

@dvarasani-crest is ! sign in PR title intentional? Consider changing base branch to release/v5.4.0
Beside above, LGTM!

@mkolasinski-splunk I have added ! to indicate this PR as a breaking change. Also, since this PR contains a BREAKING change commit, do you still think we need to rebase it to release/5.4.0? because merging this commit to release/5.4.0 would lead to release v6.0.0 when we merge release/5.4.0 to main. Let me know if we do not want to consider this as a BREAKING change.

You are right - let's keep it this way. Regarding base branch - I think we can merge it to develop as there are being aggregated changes for v6.0.0 release as far as I can see: #871

[dvarasani-crest]

@dvarasani-crest is ! sign in PR title intentional? Consider changing base branch to release/v5.4.0
Beside above, LGTM!

@mkolasinski-splunk I have added ! to indicate this PR as a breaking change. Also, since this PR contains a BREAKING change commit, do you still think we need to rebase it to release/5.4.0? because merging this commit to release/5.4.0 would lead to release v6.0.0 when we merge release/5.4.0 to main. Let me know if we do not want to consider this as a BREAKING change.

You are right - let's keep it this way. Regarding base branch - I think we can merge it to develop as there are being aggregated changes for v6.0.0 release as far as I can see: #871

Updated base branch to develop.

[srv-rr-github-token]

🎉 This issue has been resolved in version 5.4.0-beta.2 🎉

The release is available on GitHub release

Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀