report: restore old, disabled failed grouping test #7006
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
patrickhulce
approved these changes
Jan 14, 2019
|
|
||
| // All the group names in the config. | ||
| const groupNames = Array.from(new Set(auditRefs.map(ref => ref.group))).filter(Boolean); | ||
| assert.ok(groupNames.length > 5); // Make sure there are groups to test. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
we could turn the comment into an assertion message just to make things easier when it fails. though jest comes to our aid here pretty nicely already :)
|
|
||
| for (const groupName of groupNames) { | ||
| const groupAuditRefs = auditRefs.filter(ref => ref.group === groupName); | ||
| assert.ok(groupAuditRefs.length > 0); // Make sure there are audits to find. |
|
good call |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This was an old test we made the test runner skip because of changing architecture at one point, but it turns out we don't really have another test of the grouping of failing audits, which is kind of important. This restores the test :)
TMI:
I mentioned it in #5327 (comment), linked to making sure audits with warnings are shown; which is kind of weird given the test contents. I think the connection (in my head?) was that we previously marked audits with warnings as failures to make sure they showed up by default, but that all changed when we added groups for all categories in #4278.
However the conversation at the time was about the "X failed audits" header, which might be the "header" mentioned in the TODO. But that would have required a very simple adjustment of the selector to fix.
Lessons:
it.skip()tests for very long because you're going to forget why you skipped