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
upgraded cypress 11.x -> 13.x #6912
upgraded cypress 11.x -> 13.x #6912
Conversation
b861af4
to
7aebd30
Compare
4e68ddc
to
892699f
Compare
@justinclift could you please review when have time? |
I don't understand this part very well. Come and take a look. @justinclift 😁 |
@gaecoli All good, I'll take a look at this in a few hours. 😄 |
@justinclift please merge this PR before other ones in a repo to speed up e2e tests execution for other pipelines |
Sorry, just saw that. I don't have time to look at this properly for a few more hours though, so it'll have to wait until then. |
ccc6e95
to
98bb8cd
Compare
Sorry @AndrewChubatiuk, this will have to be a tomorrow thing instead of today. I've run out of time and mental energy for today. 🤦 Unless someone else gets to it overnight of course. 😄 |
@justinclift do you have time for it today? |
Yeah. I just finished most of the other bits I need to take care of today, so I'll grab some food now then go through this. 😄 |
client/cypress/cypress.js
Outdated
@@ -14,31 +12,49 @@ try { | |||
|
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.
@eradman Would you have time to look over this client/cypress/cypress.js
file?
The changes in it are more complex than I'm able to really grok atm.
The changes in the Cypress tests below though seem workable. And it'd be good to get the Cypress pieces updated past Cypress 12.x. 😄
@AndrewChubatiuk This mostly looks good. I've asked @eradman to take a look at the most complex JS file (cypress.js) in there, as it's more complex than what I can currently grok.
Will that affect people who run the Cypress tests manually themselves? ie from the cli, prior to making a PR |
98bb8cd
to
1ed8968
Compare
@justinclift updated makefile, so it should not affect existing user's setup |
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.
From my perspective this change is too large. We need to break this update into smaller steps so that we are able to fully understand.
i can help if you have any questions. most of the changes are happening in yarn.lock, cause lot's of old packages were removed after percy upgrade |
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #6912 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 63.82% 63.76% -0.06%
==========================================
Files 161 161
Lines 13060 13066 +6
Branches 1803 1803
==========================================
- Hits 8335 8332 -3
- Misses 4425 4431 +6
- Partials 300 303 +3 |
c523727
to
43753a5
Compare
@eradman @justinclift here's a smaller PR |
What type of PR is this?
upgraded cypress to fix this issue
updated db seed function which helped to remove not needed request-cookie package
removed unneeded cypress dockerfile to speed up CI build (temporary added image to pass CI checks)
updated dockerignore with more unused content for redash image
removed compose profiles
Refactor
Feature
Bug Fix
New Query Runner (Data Source)
New Alert Destination
Other
Description
How is this tested?
Related Tickets & Documents
Mobile & Desktop Screenshots/Recordings (if there are UI changes)