[rb] Add FedCM support to the ruby selenium client

[aguspe]

User description

Description

As mentioned in #12088

The goal is to add support for the Federal credential management API (FedCM) so users have access to commands that will enable them to automate it

Reference Docs:

https://fedidcg.github.io/FedCM/#automation
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/FedCM_API

Motivation and Context

On Chrome 108 FedCM has shipped and it's already implemented by several web solutions, by adding support to the client library we guarantee that more users can automate this functionality without work arounds

Types of changes

• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)

Checklist

• I have read the contributing document.
• My change requires a change to the documentation.
• I have updated the documentation accordingly.
• I have added tests to cover my changes.
• All new and existing tests passed.

---

PR Type

Enhancement, Tests

---

Description

• Added support for Federal Credential Management (FedCM) API to the Ruby Selenium client.
• Implemented HasFedCmDialog extension for handling FedCM dialogs.
• Added Account and Dialog classes to represent and handle FedCM dialogs.
• Updated bridge to include methods for interacting with FedCM dialogs.
• Added integration and unit tests for FedCM dialog interactions.
• Updated FedCM configuration and type signatures.

---

Changes walkthrough 📝

	Relevant files
Enhancement	13 files driver.rb Add FedCM dialog extension to Chromium driver                        rb/lib/selenium/webdriver/chromium/driver.rb Added DriverExtensions::HasFedCmDialog to the list of extensions. +1/-0      common.rb Require FedCM dialog and account in common driver                rb/lib/selenium/webdriver/common.rb Required has_fedcm_dialog extension. Required fedcm/account and fedcm/dialog. +3/-0      has_fedcm_dialog.rb Implement FedCM dialog handling extension                                rb/lib/selenium/webdriver/common/driver_extensions/has_fedcm_dialog.rb Added HasFedCmDialog module with methods to handle FedCM dialogs. +55/-0    fedcm.rb Autoload FedCM account and dialog modules                                rb/lib/selenium/webdriver/common/fedcm.rb Added autoload for Account and Dialog under FedCM module. +27/-0    account.rb Add FedCM account representation class                                      rb/lib/selenium/webdriver/common/fedcm/account.rb Added Account class to represent FedCM accounts. +50/-0    dialog.rb Add FedCM dialog handling class                                                    rb/lib/selenium/webdriver/common/fedcm/dialog.rb Added Dialog class to handle FedCM dialogs. +74/-0    bridge.rb Add FedCM dialog interaction methods to bridge                      rb/lib/selenium/webdriver/remote/bridge.rb Added methods to handle FedCM dialog interactions. +40/-0    commands.rb Add FedCM dialog commands to bridge                                            rb/lib/selenium/webdriver/remote/bridge/commands.rb Added FedCM dialog related commands. +13/-1    fedcm.html Update FedCM config URL to use HTTP                                            common/src/web/fedcm/fedcm.html Updated configURL to use http instead of https. +1/-1      fedcm.json Add login URL to FedCM configuration                                          common/src/web/fedcm/fedcm.json Added login_url to FedCM configuration. +2/-1      account.rbs Add type signatures for FedCM account class                            rb/sig/lib/selenium/webdriver/fedcm/account.rbs Added type signatures for Account class. +52/-0    dialog.rbs Add type signatures for FedCM dialog class                              rb/sig/lib/selenium/webdriver/fedcm/dialog.rbs Added type signatures for Dialog class. +26/-0    bridge.rbs Add type signatures for FedCM methods in bridge                    rb/sig/lib/selenium/webdriver/remote/bridge.rbs Added type signatures for FedCM dialog methods in bridge. +18/-0
Tests	3 files fedcm_spec.rb Add integration tests for FedCM dialog                                      rb/spec/integration/selenium/webdriver/fedcm_spec.rb Added integration tests for FedCM dialog interactions. +90/-0    account_spec.rb Add unit tests for FedCM account class                                      rb/spec/unit/selenium/webdriver/common/fedcm/account_spec.rb Added unit tests for Account class. +54/-0    dialog_spec.rb Add unit tests for FedCM dialog class                                        rb/spec/unit/selenium/webdriver/common/fedcm/dialog_spec.rb Added unit tests for Dialog class. +93/-0

---

💡 PR-Agent usage:
Comment /help on the PR to get a list of all available PR-Agent tools and their descriptions

[p0deje]

I noticed that edge still tried to execute the fedcm integration tests even though is only for chrome so I adjusted that and I moved the integration tests to the chrome folder

Actually, I think what you were seeing is that your implementation actually works in Edge, while you marked it to work only in Chrome. You should move the tests back from Chrome folder and mark it as only: {browser: %w[chrome edge]}. The error in CI was suggesting that:

expected pending 'Test guarded; Guarded by {:browser=>:chrome, :reason=>"No reason given"};' to fail. No error was raised.

[aguspe]

{browser: %w[chrome edge]}

I noticed that edge still tried to execute the fedcm integration tests even though is only for chrome so I adjusted that and I moved the integration tests to the chrome folder

Actually, I think what you were seeing is that your implementation actually works in Edge, while you marked it to work only in Chrome. You should move the tests back from Chrome folder and mark it as only: {browser: %w[chrome edge]}. The error in CI was suggesting that:

expected pending 'Test guarded; Guarded by {:browser=>:chrome, :reason=>"No reason given"};' to fail. No error was raised.

Thank you so much for the explanation, what throw me off before is that I tried this, but now that I looked more into the Guard implementation, this works and the test pass both with edge and chrome:

describe FedCM, exclusive: [{bidi: false, reason: 'Not yet implemented with BiDi'}, {browser: %i[chrome edge]}]

[aguspe]

Is there anything I can do to help this get merged? All the ruby tests seemed to have passed in the last run, @p0deje @titusfortner

[codiumai-pr-agent-pro]

PR Reviewer Guide 🔍

⏱️ Estimated effort to review [1-5]	3
🧪 Relevant tests	Yes
🔒 Security concerns	No
⚡ Key issues to review	Possible Bug: The implementation of the FedCM API should ensure that it handles errors gracefully, especially in scenarios where the dialog is not present or the user interaction is cancelled. This should include proper exception handling and user feedback mechanisms.
	Performance Concern: The methods related to FedCM dialog interactions (like select_account, cancel, etc.) should ensure they do not introduce significant delays or performance issues, especially in web environments where responsiveness is crucial.

[codiumai-pr-agent-pro]

PR Code Suggestions ✨

Category	Suggestion	Score
Possible issue	Initialize constants with appropriate values to avoid potential issues Consider initializing the constants LOGIN_STATE_SIGNIN and LOGIN_STATE_SIGNUP with appropriate values to avoid potential issues when these constants are used. rb/sig/lib/selenium/webdriver/fedcm/account.rbs [26-28] -LOGIN_STATE_SIGNIN: String -LOGIN_STATE_SIGNUP: String +LOGIN_STATE_SIGNIN: String = "signin" +LOGIN_STATE_SIGNUP: String = "signup" Apply this suggestion Suggestion importance[1-10]: 8 Why: Initializing constants with explicit values can prevent runtime errors and ensure consistent behavior, which is crucial for constant usage.	8
	Ensure the bridge method is called in the #click test In the #click test, the expectation should be on the method being called on the bridge, not on the return value of dialog.click. This ensures that the method call is verified correctly. rb/spec/unit/selenium/webdriver/common/fedcm/dialog_spec.rb [32-33] -expect(dialog.click).to be_nil +expect(bridge).to receive(:click_fedcm_dialog_button) +dialog.click Apply this suggestion Suggestion importance[1-10]: 7 Why: The suggestion correctly identifies a better testing practice by verifying the method call on the bridge instead of the return value, which enhances the test's accuracy.	7
	Ensure the bridge method is called in the #cancel test In the #cancel test, the expectation should be on the method being called on the bridge, not on the return value of dialog.cancel. This ensures that the method call is verified correctly. rb/spec/unit/selenium/webdriver/common/fedcm/dialog_spec.rb [39-40] -expect(dialog.cancel).to be_nil +expect(bridge).to receive(:cancel_fedcm_dialog) +dialog.cancel Apply this suggestion Suggestion importance[1-10]: 7 Why: Similar to the first suggestion, this improves the test by checking the actual method call on the bridge, ensuring that the functionality is tested rather than just the outcome.	7
Possible bug	Correct the method call in fedcm_subtitle to ensure the correct command is executed The fedcm_subtitle method should call get_fedcm_subtitle instead of get_fedcm_title to avoid confusion and ensure the correct command is executed. rb/lib/selenium/webdriver/remote/bridge.rb [625] -execute(:get_fedcm_title).fetch('subtitle', nil) +execute(:get_fedcm_subtitle).fetch('subtitle', nil) Apply this suggestion Suggestion importance[1-10]: 8 Why: This is a crucial fix as it corrects the method call to fetch the subtitle, which is likely a bug in the current implementation. Correcting this ensures the right API endpoint is used.	8
Enhancement	Add a method to handle potential errors when interacting with the FedCM dialog Consider adding a method to handle potential errors when interacting with the FedCM dialog, which can improve the robustness of the code. rb/sig/lib/selenium/webdriver/fedcm/dialog.rbs [16-17] def select_account: (Integer index) -> Remote::Response? +def handle_error: (String error_message) -> void + Apply this suggestion Suggestion importance[1-10]: 7 Why: Adding error handling methods can significantly improve the robustness and reliability of the system by managing exceptions effectively.	7
Best practice	Remove or replace the skip option in the #clicks the dialog test to ensure proper test execution The skip option in the #clicks the dialog test should be removed or replaced with a proper condition to ensure the test is executed or skipped based on a meaningful condition. rb/spec/integration/selenium/webdriver/fedcm_spec.rb [70] -it 'clicks the dialog', skip: 'Investigate IDP config issue' do +it 'clicks the dialog' do Apply this suggestion Suggestion importance[1-10]: 6 Why: This suggestion promotes best practices by encouraging the removal or proper conditional handling of the skip option in tests, which can lead to more robust testing scenarios.	6
Maintainability	Group related methods together for better code organization and readability To maintain consistency, consider grouping all fedcm related methods together in the same section of the class definition. rb/sig/lib/selenium/webdriver/remote/bridge.rbs [35-66] +def fedcm_account_list: -> [FedCM::Account] + +def fedcm_dialog_type: -> String + +def fedcm_subtitle: -> String? + +def fedcm_title: -> String + +def reset_fedcm_cooldown: -> nil + +def select_fedcm_account: -> nil + def cancel_fedcm_dialog: -> nil def click_fedcm_dialog_button: -> nil +def fedcm_delay: -> bool + Apply this suggestion Suggestion importance[1-10]: 6 Why: Grouping related methods enhances code readability and maintainability, although it's not a critical issue.	6

[p0deje]

Thank you for the contribution!