)]}'
{
  "commit": "eefd8600b6cf75da9e5d3067bc531ac3bc4faba9",
  "tree": "14b1cb6f67c92311ffb19c5787a733aecf708254",
  "parents": [
    "86dd852085db10e8fe7c2db59a9232ef8347eb67"
  ],
  "author": {
    "name": "Xinyuan Lin",
    "email": "xinyual3@uci.edu",
    "time": "Thu Aug 13 06:49:49 2026 +0000"
  },
  "committer": {
    "name": "GitHub",
    "email": "noreply@github.com",
    "time": "Thu Aug 13 06:49:49 2026 +0000"
  },
  "message": "fix(computing-unit): repair the owner-avatar accessor in the spec (#7633)\n\n### What changes were proposed in this PR?\n\n**`main` does not compile.** Any PR whose `build / amber` or `build /\namber-integration` jobs run after this landed fails on it regardless of\nwhat the PR itself touches — #7631 is an example, where the only change\nis four tests in an unrelated module\u0027s spec.\n\nScoping that honestly: PRs whose amber jobs ran *before* the breakage\nstill show green and would fail on re-run, and frontend-labelled PRs\nskip the amber stack, so this is \"every amber run from now until it is\nfixed\" rather than \"every open PR is red today\".\n\n`ComputingUnitManagingResourceSpec` asserts on\n`DashboardWorkflowComputingUnit.ownerGoogleAvatar`, but the field is\nnamed `ownerAvatar`, so `ComputingUnitManagingService / Test` fails with\ntwo \"value ownerGoogleAvatar is not a member\" errors.\n\nTwo PRs raced to produce it: #7563 renamed the field to `ownerAvatar`,\nwhile #7580 added assertions written against the old name. Each was\ngreen against its own base, and the combination is what breaks — the\nkind of thing per-PR CI cannot see when two PRs touch different files.\n\nThis renames the two accessor calls. Nothing else changes.\n\n### How was this PR tested?\n\nConfirmed the breakage is real and that this is the whole of it, by\nstashing the change and re-running on otherwise-clean `main`:\n\n```\nsbt \"ComputingUnitManagingService/Test/compile\"\n```\n\n| | Result |\n|---|---|\n| unpatched `main` | exit 1, exactly 2 × `value ownerGoogleAvatar is not\na member` |\n| with this change | exit 0, compiles clean |\n\nThen the spec itself:\n\n```\nsbt \"ComputingUnitManagingService/testOnly org.apache.texera.service.resource.ComputingUnitManagingResourceSpec\"\n```\n\n```\n[info] Total number of tests run: 31\n[info] Tests: succeeded 31, failed 0, canceled 0, ignored 0, pending 0\n```\n\nAll 31 pass, so the assertions were correct about the value and only the\naccessor name was stale. `Test/scalafmtCheck` and `Test/scalafix\n--check` both pass.\n\n### Any related issues, documentation, discussions?\n\nCloses #7632\n\n### Was this PR authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?\n\nGenerated-by: Claude Code (Opus 5)",
  "tree_diff": [
    {
      "type": "modify",
      "old_id": "5b7c64104ad53c65878fb0e451c37549b494bc7f",
      "old_mode": 33188,
      "old_path": "computing-unit-managing-service/src/test/scala/org/apache/texera/service/resource/ComputingUnitManagingResourceSpec.scala",
      "new_id": "4cbb0e0781ce0abd829bf0f9b7e30cd49e14b120",
      "new_mode": 33188,
      "new_path": "computing-unit-managing-service/src/test/scala/org/apache/texera/service/resource/ComputingUnitManagingResourceSpec.scala"
    }
  ]
}