Add Steps component to testing.mdx

[Egpereira]

Add Steps component to testing.mdx

Adds the Step component where needed.

[vercel]

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name	Status	Preview	Updated (UTC)
docs	✅ Ready (Inspect)	Visit Preview	May 1, 2024 3:28am

[astrobot-houston]

Lunaria Status Overview

🌕 This pull request will trigger status changes.

Learn more

By default, every PR changing files present in the Lunaria configuration's files property will be considered and trigger status changes accordingly.

You can change this by adding one of the keywords present in the ignoreKeywords property in your Lunaria configuration file in the PR's title (ignoring all files) or by including a tracker directive in the merged commit's description.

Tracked Files

Locale	File	Note
en	guides/testing.mdx	Source changed, localizations will be marked as outdated.

Warnings reference

Icon	Description
🔄️	The source for this localization has been updated since the creation of this pull request, make sure all changes in the source have been applied.

[HiDeoo]

Thanks for your contribution 🙌

Any specific reason why "Running your NightwatchJS tests" and "Running your Playwright tests" sections were not modified? Or maybe just missed?

[Egpereira]

Thanks for your contribution 🙌

Any specific reason why "Running your NightwatchJS tests" and "Running your Playwright tests" sections were not modified? Or maybe just missed?

I'm not 100% on this decision, but I thought that those two sections weren't actually steps to be followed, but more than one example of how to run the same commands with different flags for different outcomes.

Any thoughts on that?

[sarah11918]

!coauthor

[github-actions]

Co-authored-by: Houston (Bot) <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Sarah Rainsberger <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: HiDeoo <[email protected]>

[HiDeoo]

Thanks for your contribution 🙌
Any specific reason why "Running your NightwatchJS tests" and "Running your Playwright tests" sections were not modified? Or maybe just missed?

I'm not 100% on this decision, but I thought that those two sections weren't actually steps to be followed, but more than one example of how to run the same commands with different flags for different outcomes.

Any thoughts on that?

I think you are correct regarding NightwatchJS but then, I think the sentence above may be wrong (which initially led to my comment): "using the CLI steps below".

Altho, for Playwright, you need to run the first command before the second one which only open the report generated by the first one.

[Egpereira]

Thanks for your contribution 🙌
Any specific reason why "Running your NightwatchJS tests" and "Running your Playwright tests" sections were not modified? Or maybe just missed?

I'm not 100% on this decision, but I thought that those two sections weren't actually steps to be followed, but more than one example of how to run the same commands with different flags for different outcomes.
Any thoughts on that?

I think you are correct regarding NightwatchJS but then, I think the sentence above may be wrong (which initially led to my comment): "using the CLI steps below".

Altho, for Playwright, you need to run the first command before the second one which only open the report generated by the first one.

What about changing the sentence to "or using the CLI commands below:" (and maybe even change it to an unordered list) on NightwatchJS section and using the steps component for the Playwright one?

[sarah11918]

I am going to merge this one as is for the Steps component, so that no other significant changes occur for the translators to handle!

If anyone would like to revisit wording on this page, let's do it in a separate PR!

[Egpereira]

Proposed change for the NightwatchJS section (unordered list and "commands" instead of "steps"):

Proposed change for the Playwright section (actually use the Steps component)

[Egpereira]

@HiDeoo let me know what you think and I can open another PR afterwards if needed.

[HiDeoo]

@HiDeoo let me know what you think and I can open another PR afterwards if needed.

I personally think it's way better 👍 If you're up for it, let's make a new PR and see what other people think about it, but at least for me, I find your solution more correct and readable.

[Egpereira]

@HiDeoo let me know what you think and I can open another PR afterwards if needed.

I personally think it's way better 👍 If you're up for it, let's make a new PR and see what other people think about it, but at least for me, I find your solution more correct and readable.

Perfect, I'll open it as soon as I can (and after these changes are on the main branch) and I'll tag you in the PR or in the discord chat to take a look. Thanks!