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
test(popper): additional popper and popover e2e tests #141
test(popper): additional popper and popover e2e tests #141
Conversation
BTW: Can I just keep these commit as the are? Or should I squash them before merging? |
Test summaryRun details
View run in Cypress Dashboard ➡️ This comment has been generated by cypress-bot as a result of this project's GitHub integration settings. You can manage this integration in this project's settings in the Cypress Dashboard |
Given('a Popover is rendered with placement left', () => { | ||
cy.visitStory('Popover', 'Placement Left') | ||
}) | ||
Given('a Popover with position left is shited into view', () => { |
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.
typo, shifted
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.
😆
}) | ||
|
||
Then('the Arrow is horizontally aligned with the Popper', () => { | ||
cy.getPositionsBySelectors( |
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.
Maybe we should resolve this first: #106
I would use the I you ask me, I'd say squash to a commit that changes the popper test, a commit that does the popover tests, and the one with the sharedPropType fix. Unless they're all somehow related. |
Looks good to me. I personally think it'd be nice to resolve #106 if we can, before merging this. That way we won't be introducing more tests that need to be refactored later. Other than that and the small typo this looks good to merge to me. |
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.
What @ismay said. I think the commit messages could be squashed
d109f03
to
e7585d9
Compare
I've squashed all my commits, fixed the typo and have implemented the position assertions as discussed in #106 (and a little bit on Slack). So I think this is now ready for a re-review. |
6bda491
to
0356ec0
Compare
Commit history (before squashing) - fix(popover): add position absolute to arrow to prevent misplacement (See floating-ui/react-popper#354) - test(popover): add e2e tests and stories for arrow positions - chore(popover): fix typo in feature file and test - refactor(popper): replace e2e story decorator by helper component (This prepares the story for the new e2e test which are not going to be compatible with the decorator logic) - fix(popper): use correct sharedPropType name - test(popper): prepare e2e stories about different types of references - test(popper): add e2e test and stories for different types of references - chore(popper): stop using `getPositionsBySelectors` helper in new tests - chore(popover): stop using `getPositionsBySelectors` helper in new tests - chore(popover): fix typo in feature step definition
e617ec4
to
a1a29e9
Compare
🎉 This PR is included in version 5.0.2 🎉 The release is available on:
Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀 |
This adds some tests to check the arrow positions for the
Popover
and different reference types for thePopper
. When merged, issue #83 can be closed.Along the way I also fixed a few typos and a bug (see commit 209e5be and this issue floating-ui/react-popper#354)