Adding logic to TestSelector to remove unit tests if they are in excluded_resource_types

[TowardOliver]

Resolves #10656

Problem

Currently, including "unit_test" in the DBT_EXCLUDE_RESOURCE_TYPES env variable (or passing via --exclude-resource-type) will prevent unit tests from running when using the dbt build, list and clone commands ONLY.

I want to extend this to also prevent unit tests from running when using the dbt test command.

Solution

I've added a check to the TestSelector, to check the if unit_test has been set in the exclusion list. If it has, then it only allows data tests to run.

Default behaviour is to run both unit and data tests.

It's only a small / simple change. But it will get the job done of preventing unit tests from running on our Prod environments when running dbt test.

Checklist

• I have read the contributing guide and understand what's expected of me.
• I have run this code in development, and it appears to resolve the stated issue.
• This PR includes tests, or tests are not required or relevant for this PR.
• This PR has no interface changes (e.g., macros, CLI, logs, JSON artifacts, config files, adapter interface, etc.) or this PR has already received feedback and approval from Product or DX.
• This PR includes type annotations for new and modified functions.

[cla-bot]

Thank you for your pull request and welcome to our community. We could not parse the GitHub identity of the following contributors: Matthew.Cooper.
This is most likely caused by a git client misconfiguration; please make sure to:

1. check if your git client is configured with an email to sign commits git config --list | grep email
2. If not, set it up using git config --global user.email email@example.com
3. Make sure that the git commit email is configured in your GitHub account settings, see https://github.com/settings/emails

[github-actions]

Thank you for your pull request! We could not find a changelog entry for this change. For details on how to document a change, see the contributing guide.

[cla-bot]

Thanks for your pull request, and welcome to our community! We require contributors to sign our Contributor License Agreement and we don't seem to have your signature on file. Check out this article for more information on why we have a CLA.

In order for us to review and merge your code, please submit the Individual Contributor License Agreement form attached above above. If you have questions about the CLA, or if you believe you've received this message in error, please reach out through a comment on this PR.

CLA has not been signed by users: @TowardOliver

[cla-bot]

Thanks for your pull request, and welcome to our community! We require contributors to sign our Contributor License Agreement and we don't seem to have your signature on file. Check out this article for more information on why we have a CLA.

In order for us to review and merge your code, please submit the Individual Contributor License Agreement form attached above above. If you have questions about the CLA, or if you believe you've received this message in error, please reach out through a comment on this PR.

CLA has not been signed by users: @TowardOliver

[TowardOliver]

I've just signed the CLA, so hopefully this now proceeds.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 88.89%. Comparing base (9b7f4ff) to head (4914cc9).
Report is 6 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #10657      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   88.94%   88.89%   -0.06%     
==========================================
  Files         180      180              
  Lines       22778    22783       +5     
==========================================
- Hits        20260    20252       -8     
- Misses       2518     2531      +13     

Flag	Coverage Δ
integration	86.13% <100.00%> (-0.15%)	⬇️
unit	62.34% <33.33%> (-0.01%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Components	Coverage Δ
Unit Tests	62.34% <33.33%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
Integration Tests	86.13% <100.00%> (-0.15%)	⬇️

[dbeatty10]

Nice @TowardOliver !

Could you do something similar just a little earlier in the file for when dbt test --exclude-resource-types unit_test? You can copy-paste-modify the section that starts with "# Run build command but specify no unit tests".

[dbeatty10]

@cla-bot check

[cla-bot]

The cla-bot has been summoned, and re-checked this pull request!

[TowardOliver]

I've added the specific unit test you mentioned @dbeatty10 to test dbt test --exclude-resource-types unit_test.

Although I see that you've raised your own PR here: #10706
So hopefully that one goes through!

[dbeatty10]

@TowardOliver Your PR provided the map of everything that needed to be done, plus the unit tests to verify it. 🤩 That empowered me to see how we could solve this though a refactor. Thank you!

#10706 includes your commits and also lists you as co-author to preserve the credit for your contributions.

[dbeatty10]

Thanks again for proposing this feature in #10656 and then "showing the way" in this PR @TowardOliver 🏆 !

We just merged #10706, so closing this PR now that the feature is implemented.