Removed version numbers from conformance test names#1726
Conversation
|
|
robmoffat
changed the title
|
|
|
This looks good to me, but lets hold on merging it until #1586 is in. I have a number of additions to this PR queued up to add (e.g. removing all the remaining 2.0 and 2_0, etc.) |
kriswest
force-pushed
the
conformance-test-rename
branch
from
bfb21d2 to
bc92d2e
Compare
✅ Deploy Preview for fdc3 canceled.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
| const RaiseIntentFailTargetedAppResolve3 = | ||
| "(RaiseIntentFailTargetedAppResolve3) Should fail to raise intent when targeting a non-existant app id, context 'testContextY', intent 'sharedTestingIntent2' and throw IntentDeliveryFailed error"; | ||
| "(RaiseIntentFailTargetedAppResolve3) Should fail to raise intent when targeting an app that doesn't add an intent listener, context 'testContextY', intent 'sharedTestingIntent2' and throw IntentDeliveryFailed error"; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Corrected test description for RaiseIntentFailTargetedAppResolve3
|
|
||
| const RaiseIntentFailTargetedAppResolve4 = | ||
| "(RaiseIntentFailTargetedAppResolve4) Should throw an IntentDeliveryFailed error when raising intent with targeted app intent-i, context 'testContextY', intent 'sharedTestingIntent2'"; | ||
| "(RaiseIntentFailTargetedAppResolve4) Should fail to raise intent when targeting an app that doesn't add an intent listener of the matching type, context 'testContextY', intent 'sharedTestingIntent2' and throw IntentDeliveryFailed error"; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Corrected test description for RaiseIntentFailTargetedAppResolve4
|
|
kriswest
left a comment
kriswest
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM after additional changes to remove the FDC3 version number from paths, mock implementations etc.. Those changes simplify the overall implementation slightly. I've also corrected a couple of test descriptions in the 'fdc3.raiseIntent (throws error)' suite.
Confirmed that the reference implementation is passing all tests:
Will need a further review from @finos/fdc3-maintainers as I've pushed to the branch last.
|
@robmoffat this should be ready to go now. Once merged we can create a tag for you to deploy as the candidate 2.2 test set (assuming it works for others) |
|
I managed to successfully run a complete conformance test on the demo app and get all tests passing. I was under the impresstion that dev worked without build but perhaps I am wrong. Only mentioning it here as it was different to what I expected and as I say I'm sure it's nothing to do with this PR. LGTM |
In a fresh checkout, you do need to run build at the root of the FDC3 repo (which will build everything) before running There are frameworks that can however, such as https://nx.dev/ Oh wait, do you mean the root package.json Line 43 in ed5f2c8 That does appear to be missing the build step for fdc3-web-impl and should probably be adjusted to include it |
|
I have often thought of converting this repo over to nx. I actually occassionally run nx commands forgetting that it's not an nx repo!!! It would massively improve some of the build tasks we do. I think that currently there is a lot of duplicated steps if we run I am hesitant to bring this up though as there is a learning curve with nx and if we migrated it would mean that all contributors would have to understand it. I think I've already changed the way we have to work enough by converting to vitest! 😉 |
3 participants
Describe your change
Related Issue
Contributor License Agreement
Review Checklist