Fix "RET503", # Missing explicit return at the end of function able to return non-None value

[jiridanek]

No description provided.

[github-actions]

Robot Results

✅ Passed	❌ Failed	⏭️ Skipped	Total	Pass %
456	0	0	456	100

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
1 New issue
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
No data about Coverage
1.8% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarCloud

changes made

[dhirajsb]

I'm not sure why I'm being asked to review this? Did you mean to request a review from someone else?

[jiridanek]

I'm not sure why I'm being asked to review this? Did you mean to request a review from someone else?

I clicked all the autosuggestions from github, should be based on who edited the files recently. It's possible i missclicked. If so, sorry about the disturbance.

[jstourac]

@jiridanek has this been tested indeed? I can see following failure in our job 🤔

07:30:59  + python3 /home/jenkins/workspace/rhods/exploratory-test-rhods-deploy/ods-ci/ods_ci/utils/scripts/ocm/ocm.py ocm_login --token ****
07:30:59  Traceback (most recent call last):
07:30:59    File "/home/jenkins/workspace/rhods/exploratory-test-rhods-deploy/ods-ci/ods_ci/utils/scripts/ocm/ocm.py", line 28, in <module>
07:30:59      class OpenshiftClusterManager:
07:30:59    File "/home/jenkins/workspace/rhods/exploratory-test-rhods-deploy/ods-ci/ods_ci/utils/scripts/ocm/ocm.py", line 1186, in OpenshiftClusterManager
07:30:59      def change_cluster_channel_group(self) -> str | None:
07:30:59  TypeError: unsupported operand type(s) for |: 'type' and 'NoneType'

[jiridanek]

The initial version was semantically equivalent code. The changes I did at @kobihk 's suggestion do have potential to break things. And no, I did not test it before merge.

[jiridanek]

The fix is to add

from __future__ import annotations

at the top of the file. Be cause file is nor run with python3 11 but with some older python.

I'll put it in when I get to the office in 1.30 hours or so.

[kobihk]

The initial version was semantically equivalent code. The changes I did at @kobihk 's suggestion do have potential to break things. And no, I did not test it before merge.

@jiridanek maybe without the definition of return type it could work