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

feat(e2e): migrate unlinked page tests to playwright #1790

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Mar 15, 2024

Conversation

seaerchin
Copy link
Contributor

Problem

Previously, the tests for editing of unlinked pages were done in cypress. This PR migrates them to playwright. importantly, do take note that there's a shift to testing them on email based login - easier to setup (done alr in prev PR) + majority of our sites are on email based login. (also more complex)

Solution

  1. Add a getApi method - we need this because we set baseURL to be that for our frontend (so that navigation works fine)
  2. migrate from using cypress selectors to playwright locators.

Copy link
Contributor

@dcshzj dcshzj left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think edit page spec might get quite big + encompass a lot of different types/permutations of editing. Should we consider splitting into markdown editing and tiptap editing?

Also, I think we can separate out the collection + resource room editing into a separate spec that focuses more on testing aspects that are more specific to those types of editing.

e2e/editPage.spec.ts Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Contributor

@kishore03109 kishore03109 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

i dont have blocking comments for this specific pr, but i do air similar concerns to zj + think we need to cover the edge cases for the two different editors

e2e/editPage.spec.ts Show resolved Hide resolved
@seaerchin
Copy link
Contributor Author

I think edit page spec might get quite big + encompass a lot of different types/permutations of editing. Should we consider splitting into markdown editing and tiptap editing?

Also, I think we can separate out the collection + resource room editing into a separate spec that focuses more on testing aspects that are more specific to those types of editing.

agreed for tiptap + markdown - right now, goal is not to add more test specs but rather, to get to parity. lmk if you're ok w/ just adding md specs here and tiptap specs further down the line

@dcshzj
Copy link
Contributor

dcshzj commented Feb 5, 2024

agreed for tiptap + markdown - right now, goal is not to add more test specs but rather, to get to parity. lmk if you're ok w/ just adding md specs here and tiptap specs further down the line

Yup I think we can add the tiptap ones later. I think we are still in the midst of stablising tiptap so it would be a bit troublesome to create them right now.

@mergify mergify bot requested a review from a team March 6, 2024 04:54
Copy link

mergify bot commented Mar 6, 2024

This pull request has been stale for more than 30 days! Could someone please take a look at it @isomerpages/iso-engineers

@seaerchin seaerchin force-pushed the feat/playwright branch 2 times, most recently from 640baf0 to 14a83ad Compare March 15, 2024 10:55
Base automatically changed from feat/playwright to develop March 15, 2024 10:55
@seaerchin seaerchin merged commit 21cb239 into develop Mar 15, 2024
4 of 5 checks passed
@seaerchin seaerchin deleted the feat/e2e-editpage branch March 15, 2024 11:04
@seaerchin seaerchin mentioned this pull request Mar 21, 2024
7 tasks
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.

4 participants