-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 126
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
Fix build failure #105
Fix build failure #105
Conversation
…re-optimizing-test
- Removed call to api. - Added test to options handler instead
- Merge branch 'feature-optimizing-test' of https://github.com/JuanMaRuiz/psi into feature-optimizing-test - Removed api-response-test
…iz/psi into feature-optimizing-test
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Great tests 👍 🎉
I think I still like the idea of integration testing with the real API. Tbh it was a good test, it kept failing due to the API itself being flaky, which definitely helped me in diagnosing the underlying errors.
nit: changing the wording of the test methods
Co-Authored-By: Shane Exterkamp <shaneexterkamp5@gmail.com>
Co-Authored-By: Shane Exterkamp <shaneexterkamp5@gmail.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I talked to another dev (hi @connorjclark) and I think we both agreed that the more simple solution to the monkey-patching of handleOpts
and getThreshold
would be to just modules.export
them to test them directly without rewire
. I think exporting would be better than adding another dependency.
Sorry for the 11th hour feedback 😃
No problem, I think is a better solution. The initial idea was not changing the original code too much, but I prefer your solution. Best regards. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM. If you want to make the 1 final change I called it out, but not a dealbreaker.
Otherwise I'll land this.
Although the coverage of psi is great
I think there are some minor changes that could be included in order to have more stable tests.
In the last PR we had some problems in the test, marking the build as instable, due a connection with the API. Another problem, related with travis and web requests was solved in the pass.
If we take a look to
api-response.test.js
we see that tests are:From my point of view we should avoid this call to the real API and test should check the methods instead.
This PR contains several changes that try to solve that.
Hope it helps.
Best regards.