Skip to content
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

🎨 removing jupyterlab flaky part of the e2e test #5371

Conversation

matusdrobuliak66
Copy link
Contributor

@matusdrobuliak66 matusdrobuliak66 commented Feb 26, 2024

What do these changes do?

  • 🎨 I have removed the flaky part of the jupyterlab test connected to jupyter math service while I manage to create a more stable test. (This change is already used in the e2e tests from my personal branch and I can confirm that the not stable part of the test was removed.)

Related issue/s

How to test

Dev Checklist

DevOps Checklist

@matusdrobuliak66 matusdrobuliak66 marked this pull request as ready for review February 26, 2024 09:00
@matusdrobuliak66 matusdrobuliak66 changed the title 🎨 removing jupyterlab flaky part of the test 🎨 removing jupyterlab flaky part of the e2e test Feb 26, 2024
@matusdrobuliak66 matusdrobuliak66 enabled auto-merge (squash) February 26, 2024 09:04
Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 26, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 65.0%. Comparing base (a735871) to head (6e63c63).

Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##           master   #5371      +/-   ##
=========================================
- Coverage    87.5%   65.0%   -22.5%     
=========================================
  Files        1317     539     -778     
  Lines       54175   27178   -26997     
  Branches     1176     203     -973     
=========================================
- Hits        47407   17690   -29717     
- Misses       6518    9437    +2919     
+ Partials      250      51     -199     
Flag Coverage Δ
integrationtests 65.0% <ø> (-0.1%) ⬇️
unittests ?

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

see 1110 files with indirect coverage changes

Copy link
Contributor

@GitHK GitHK left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

OK I guess

@GitHK GitHK added this to the Schoggilebe milestone Feb 26, 2024
@GitHK GitHK added the e2e Bugs found by or related to the end-2-end testing label Feb 26, 2024
Copy link

Quality Gate Passed Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
No data about Coverage
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarCloud

Copy link
Collaborator

@elisabettai elisabettai left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks.

I'm curious to see why jupyter-math specifically is flaky (doesn't the jupyterlab UI show up correctly?). I'll check if I can spot some meaningful playwrite tests.

@matusdrobuliak66 matusdrobuliak66 merged commit 69ad2cc into ITISFoundation:master Feb 26, 2024
55 checks passed
@matusdrobuliak66
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks.

I'm curious to see why jupyter-math specifically is flaky (doesn't the jupyterlab UI show up correctly?). I'll check if I can spot some meaningful playwrite tests.

no no the UI shows correctly. The test is written not in a stable way meaning that sometimes when he is looking for the jupyter math button he doesn't see it

page.frame_locator(".qx-main-dark").get_by_text("python (maths)").first.click()

this line of code needs to be written differently, but I do not know yet how.

jsaq007 pushed a commit to jsaq007/osparc-simcore that referenced this pull request Feb 27, 2024
jsaq007 pushed a commit to jsaq007/osparc-simcore that referenced this pull request Mar 4, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
e2e Bugs found by or related to the end-2-end testing
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants