Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

E2e test poc #116

Merged
merged 17 commits into from
Nov 25, 2020
Merged

E2e test poc #116

merged 17 commits into from
Nov 25, 2020

Conversation

shahzad31
Copy link
Contributor

@shahzad31 shahzad31 commented Oct 29, 2020

This is a POC for how we can make sure e2e things are working

  1. It will run examples journeys through docker
  2. Will setup kibana, es
  3. Will run an inline journey to make sure data is being populate in kibana uptime app for those example journeys

You can test by running

npm run test inside __tests/e2e dir

@apmmachine
Copy link

apmmachine commented Oct 29, 2020

💚 Build Succeeded

the below badges are clickable and redirect to their specific view in the CI or DOCS
Pipeline View Test View Changes Artifacts preview

Expand to view the summary

Build stats

  • Build Cause: [Pull request #116 updated]

  • Start Time: 2020-11-25T09:51:04.118+0000

  • Duration: 12 min 29 sec

Test stats 🧪

Test Results
Failed 0
Passed 45
Skipped 0
Total 45

Copy link
Member

@vigneshshanmugam vigneshshanmugam left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for starting this Shazad. Couple of suggestions. Keeping bunch of commands on package.json would ease up the process locally and we can even invoke them on CI.

  • npm run setup - would kick in and start necessary images
  • npm run test - would make sure kibana is running locally and starts and verifies the runner
  • move the root level e2e folder inside tests as we dont want to have mutiple root level directories.

Copy link
Contributor

@andrewvc andrewvc left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is a great improvement, but I think the shell scripts may create more issues than they solve. Left the details of my concerns there in the comment with @jahtalab

I also left some comments on improving the shell scripts if indeed that is the way we want to go.

Another thought, we could use node instead of bash to drive any orchestration. Shell gets unwieldy sometimes

Copy link
Member

@vigneshshanmugam vigneshshanmugam left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Its in a good shape, personally i would move this shell stuff to JS, but we can keep it for now and move to JS at some point to customize it.

Have not tested it, but will take it for a spin sometime this week.

Copy link
Contributor

@hmdhk hmdhk left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks @shahzad31 , I left some comments.

Also would you please have a look at the merge check list, it is failing at the moment?

@shahzad31 shahzad31 requested a review from hmdhk November 25, 2020 09:23
@shahzad31 shahzad31 merged commit 30165fd into master Nov 25, 2020
@shahzad31 shahzad31 deleted the e2e-test branch November 25, 2020 10:57
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants