Migrate test suite to switchblade #977
Conversation
robdimsdale
commented
Jul 25, 2024
robdimsdale
commented
- delete low-value tests.
robdimsdale
force-pushed
the
rewrite-using-switchblade
branch
from
942d784
to
7b1f50a
Compare
- delete low-value tests.
robdimsdale
force-pushed
the
rewrite-using-switchblade
branch
from
7b1f50a
to
9314709
Compare
| It("works with old version of bundler 2", func() { | ||
| app = cutlass.New(Fixtures("bundler_2")) | ||
| PushAppAndConfirm(app) | ||
| Expect(app.Stdout.String()).To(MatchRegexp(`Your Gemfile.lock was bundled with bundler 2\.\d+\.\d+, which is incompatible with the current bundler version \(2\.\d+\.\d+\)`)) | ||
| Expect(app.Stdout.String()).To(ContainSubstring(`Deleting "Bundled With" from the Gemfile.lock`)) | ||
| Expect(app.GetBody("/")).To(ContainSubstring("Hello world!")) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
if we support building apps with EOS Bundler versions, this feels like something we should test
There was a problem hiding this comment.
When this test was written it wasn't really designed to be an EOL test, bundler 2 was just new. The log statements were added later.
Bundler 2 isn't EOL, and I'm not aware of any reason why we should care about testing that apps bundled with older bundlers should work with the buildpack. My understanding is that bundler handles this. It's not a buildpack behavior.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It looks like we actually delete the line in the Gemfile.lock file that causes issues here -
ruby-buildpack/src/ruby/supply/supply.go
Lines 842 to 843 in 40bdf71
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ok. I think that's fair feedback. I'd be happy to include that.
src/ruby/integration/deploy_an_app_with_custom_gemfile_bad_dummy_gemfile_test.go
Show resolved
Hide resolved
| Expect(app).To(HaveUnchangedAppdir("BuildDir Checksum Before Supply", "BuildDir Checksum After Supply")) | ||
|
|
||
| Expect(app.GetBody("/")).To(ContainSubstring("Successfully required execjs")) | ||
| Expect(app.Stdout.String()).ToNot(ContainSubstring("ExecJS::RuntimeUnavailable")) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
is this not a case we care to test for anymore?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As far as I can tell, there's nothing special about execjs that isn't covered by other apps with javascript (rails6_sprockets, rails7, etc). It's just a library that happens to have a dependency on javascript.
This test was added 9 years ago. There's no real context in the tracker story other than "using the latest version of nodejs".
So I wonder if this test was just the one example they used to drive out nodejs support. But we have that covered by other tests.
|
It's hard to comment because my GH UI keeps freezing. My main point of review is understanding the reasons we deleted some tests with no replacement. I understand some might not be good tests, or might be out of date. Some explanation of the more controversial removals might be useful |
😬
Sure. But I don't know what you consider controversial :) I can go through and explain each test removal |
|
@robdimsdale I can try to save you some time and make a list of the ones im wondering about |
|
@robdimsdale I think we covered the main items I was concerned about, let's get this merged in |
