System tests should cleanup after themselves

[ATorrise]

What It Does
This PR enhances the test framework to simplify and automate the cleanup of test resources, such as datasets, USS files, jobs, and local files. The TestEnvironment, ITestEnvironment, and TestUtils classes have been updated to track and delete resources after system tests, preventing any leftover artifacts on the mainframe or local filesystem.

How to Test : Run System Tests

• Execute the system tests as usual. Verify that all created resources (datasets, USS files, jobs, local files) are automatically cleaned up after the tests complete.
• Ensure that no traces of jobs, USS files, or datasets are left behind on the mainframe.

Review Checklist
I certify that I have:

• tested my changes
• added/updated automated tests
• updated the changelog
• followed the contribution guidelines

Additional Comments

• Test Stability
  • Occasionally, environment-specific issues may arise, especially with test datasets like IEFBR14 files. I'm not sure how to rectify this and definitely need areas using these files double-checked.
• Unchanged Files:
  • zowe-cli\packages\zosjobs\__tests__\__system__\MonitorJobs.system.test.ts only had minor indentation changes and was left intact as it leaves no jobs behind on the mainframe.
  • If a test file cleans up all resources, it was left without changes to avoid unnecessary modifications since most of these test files are large and would require many lines of renovations.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 91.26%. Comparing base (609c2ff) to head (9de05a2).
Report is 5 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           master    #2216    +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage   91.26%   91.26%            
========================================
  Files         628      628            
  Lines       17821    17821            
  Branches     3820     3715   -105     
========================================
  Hits        16264    16264            
  Misses       1556     1556            
  Partials        1        1            

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[zFernand0]

Thanks for addressing the PR feedback.
I believe there are a couple of things were we could improve on this one.
Left them in the comments. 😋

[zFernand0]

When using generics, it's advisable to keep the name short, and ideally something different to an existing interface.

you could get the same benefits by doing <T extends ITestPropertiesSchema> and use the value of T as the desired type for this properti (e.g. systemTestProperties: T)

[ATorrise]

@awharn

[awharn]

Since the value before was TestPropertiesSchema, do we need to make that change? I am also a bit confused with the difference between generics and interfaces in this particular context.

[zFernand0]

Again, these are Typescript generics which do not have any impact on users.

Having the ITestPropertiesSchema will cause confusion as we might expect the interface to be taking effect when it won't.

The reason why TestPropertiesSchema never caused problems was because it was just the name that we gave it (which is equivalent to using a single letter, like T)

Hence the suggestion of T extends ITestPropertiesSchema to get the benefits of the interface 😋

Feel free to ignore this comment if you feel I'm completely off base here (because, honestly, I might be) 😅

[ATorrise]

ok i just reverted changes to the file... is that alright? commit: 2d1c9be
@zFernand0 @t1m0thyj

[t1m0thyj]

Looks pretty good, thanks @ATorrise for cleaning up so many tests! Left a few comments requesting minor changes in the TestEnvironment code

Changes requested were addressed 😋

[zFernand0]

Final requested changes, I promise. 😓
And we can determine if we want to address them here, or in a future PR 😅

As it stands, there are a few system tests failing with this branch. 😢

Happy to discuss specifics offline 😋

[gejohnston]

I am unable to find any concern beyond what others have already raised.

There are so many file changes it is difficult to identify new-common-cleanup logic from many test fixes and test additions. If there is an opportunity, maybe sometime you can walk me through the fundamental changes that enable common-cleanup.

[sonarcloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarCloud