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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
MAINT - Ensure Playwright tests use test sites and are run in CI #2133
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
MAINT - Ensure Playwright tests use test sites and are run in CI #2133
Changes from 11 commits
ed82b1f
3d4ca2d
bf18dbf
7447a8a
b4685cf
0e9d265
139ae14
8484e8f
41cbf93
5e8eecb
853ece8
d027352
ddb5997
581a91c
3f9342f
f629966
b2dbcbf
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
[nitpick] having all this link-shortening-related content here is a bit confusing; a future maintainer looking at this site might mistake the test site's purpose. I'm assuming it's a copy-paste job; although it's a bit more work I would tend toward making test sites as bare-bones as possible, with all content reinforcing the test site's purpose. For example, this page might say
Page 1 ====== Meaningless content; the point of this test site is the version switcher.
That said, I'm also not opposed to grouping several tests into a single test site (to reduce the ratio of build time to test time), and have 1 page on the site for each test (e.g., a page for link shortening, a page for code blocks, a page for breadcrumbs, etc). But I wouldn't expect that to happen in a test site with the name
version_switcher
.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 basically copied the test site from the base one and made some adjustments.
I think we could simplify it somehow or even fold this into the base test site but that can be done in a separate pr.
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.
ditto the prior [nitpick] comment; a site that only tests the version switcher probably only needs a single page, and if it needs multiple pages, they shouldn't be doing unrelated things like hiding sidebars.
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.
This is fine for now, but the advice "or use an existing one" might change depending on what others think of my (admittedly opinionated) suggestions to whittle down to a bare-bones one-purpose-per-test-site approach.
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.
TBF I like your proposal of simplifying the tests by reducing the number of test sites.
I added this comment for now as we struggled at first to identify why the site was not being built or on what sites we were running tests
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 ran into this as well while debugging; strictly speaking
parent=True
should not be necessary if the docs have been built. So I think in the event that the parent directories oftest_sites_dir
don't exist, you've got a build problem that will make the tests fail anyway.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.
Is the reason for keeping it that
site_path
isn't a child oftest_sites_dir
? That would explain the symlinking a few lines below. (I know I wrote that code but I don't recall exactly why I did it that way)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 thought there might be a reason for the symlink 🤷🏽♀️ but I do not see a reason why we would have to keep this as is. I can go and refactor this.