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

Adds coverage on order confirmation page #11682

Conversation

filipefurtad0
Copy link
Contributor

Covers the changes introduced in PRs #11668 and #11114.

What? Why?

The UI is tested according to the three scenarios described in #11668.

What should we test?

  • green build

Release notes

Changelog Category (reviewers may add a label for the release notes):

  • User facing changes
  • API changes (V0, V1, DFC or Webhook)
  • Technical changes only
  • Feature toggled

The title of the pull request will be included in the release notes.

Dependencies

Documentation updates

@filipefurtad0 filipefurtad0 added the technical changes only These pull requests do not contain user facing changes and are grouped in release notes label Oct 18, 2023
Copy link
Member

@abdellani abdellani left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM
Thank you @filipefurtad0 🙏

Copy link
Member

@dacook dacook left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Great!

I didn't know you can use a before block with it_behaves_like. It's interesting to note that while all the comparisons are similar, you've chosen to build some into the shared_example, and copy some in the before block.
I don't think it matters either way, and it seems like a good compromise to me 👍


shared_examples "order confirmation page" do |paid_state, paid_amount|
it "displays the relevant information" do
expect(page).to have_content paid_state.to_s
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think to_s shouldn't be necessary because it's already a string comparison. But it's no big deal :)

@dacook dacook merged commit 3805988 into openfoodfoundation:master Oct 19, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
technical changes only These pull requests do not contain user facing changes and are grouped in release notes
Projects
Archived in project
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants