tests typescript migration #31234
Merged
tests typescript migration #31234
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
vitalics
added
WIP
|
Pinging @elastic/kibana-qa |
|
Pinging @elastic/kibana-app |
💔 Build Failed |
|
@elastic/kibana-platform could you please add missing dependencies to |
|
@vitalics I was working on something similar but it looks like you're a bit further along. I'm going to see how I can move this forward. |
💔 Build Failed |
💔 Build Failed |
💔 Build Failed |
💚 Build Succeeded |
stacey-gammon
approved these changes
Feb 22, 2019
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is awesome! didn't check anything locally, @mattkime talked about verifying that intended failure will show up as a failure which sounds like a great plan prior to merge, but otherwise it looks good to me!
| @@ -75,6 +75,7 @@ const functionalTestRunner = createFunctionalTestRunner({ | |||
| bail: cmd.bail, | |||
| grep: cmd.grep, | |||
| invert: cmd.invert, | |||
| require: `ts-node/register --project tests/tsconfig.json -r tsconfig-paths/register -T "test/**/*.{ts,js}"` | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So I guess this is the key part that was missing in my PR? Any idea why this works? Do we need this ts-node step for other packages? Just curious.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Its initializing typescript parsing before loading ts files. https://github.com/TypeStrong/ts-node#mocha
Do we need this
ts-nodestep for other packages? Just curious.
I suspect not since its being added at the test runner level but I'm not 100%.
mattkime
pushed a commit
to mattkime/kibana
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 22, 2019
* add typescript support for functional tests
mattkime
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 22, 2019
spalger
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 28, 2019
…onfig files (#31948) In #31234 there were some extra changes that I've reverted, like use of the `tsconfig-paths` package to magically rewrite import statements to defy the standard node module resolution algorithm, the inclusion of several unnecessary options in the `test/tsconfig.json` file, and changes of the line-endings in the config files. This also brings a few enhancements from #30190 including a modularized version of the expect.js types, and options for explicit mappings for the PageObjects and services used in ftr tests.
spalger
pushed a commit
to spalger/kibana
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 28, 2019
…onfig files (elastic#31948) In elastic#31234 there were some extra changes that I've reverted, like use of the `tsconfig-paths` package to magically rewrite import statements to defy the standard node module resolution algorithm, the inclusion of several unnecessary options in the `test/tsconfig.json` file, and changes of the line-endings in the config files. This also brings a few enhancements from elastic#30190 including a modularized version of the expect.js types, and options for explicit mappings for the PageObjects and services used in ftr tests.
spalger
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 28, 2019
…onfig files (#31948) (#32250) In #31234 there were some extra changes that I've reverted, like use of the `tsconfig-paths` package to magically rewrite import statements to defy the standard node module resolution algorithm, the inclusion of several unnecessary options in the `test/tsconfig.json` file, and changes of the line-endings in the config files. This also brings a few enhancements from #30190 including a modularized version of the expect.js types, and options for explicit mappings for the PageObjects and services used in ftr tests.
spalger
pushed a commit
to spalger/kibana
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 9, 2019
* add typescript support for functional tests
spalger
pushed a commit
to spalger/kibana
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 9, 2019
…onfig files (elastic#31948) In elastic#31234 there were some extra changes that I've reverted, like use of the `tsconfig-paths` package to magically rewrite import statements to defy the standard node module resolution algorithm, the inclusion of several unnecessary options in the `test/tsconfig.json` file, and changes of the line-endings in the config files. This also brings a few enhancements from elastic#30190 including a modularized version of the expect.js types, and options for explicit mappings for the PageObjects and services used in ftr tests. # Conflicts: # src/functional_test_runner/lib/config/schema.js # test/common/services/es.ts # test/functional/page_objects/index.ts # test/functional/services/apps_menu.js # yarn.lock
|
Backporting to 7.0 in #32827 |
spalger
pushed a commit
to spalger/kibana
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 9, 2019
…onfig files (elastic#31948) In elastic#31234 there were some extra changes that I've reverted, like use of the `tsconfig-paths` package to magically rewrite import statements to defy the standard node module resolution algorithm, the inclusion of several unnecessary options in the `test/tsconfig.json` file, and changes of the line-endings in the config files. This also brings a few enhancements from elastic#30190 including a modularized version of the expect.js types, and options for explicit mappings for the PageObjects and services used in ftr tests. # Conflicts: # src/functional_test_runner/lib/config/schema.js # test/common/services/es.ts # test/functional/page_objects/index.ts # test/functional/services/apps_menu.js # yarn.lock
spalger
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 9, 2019
…32827) * [ts] add script to verify that all ts is in a project (#32727) Based on #32705 We currently have TypeScript code that was backported to 7.0, which was backported without issue because it falls outside of any TypeScript projects in 7.0. This means that the pre-commit hooks break on changes to these files, and that they are not getting type checked by the type_check script. To fix this we need to verify that every typescript file in the repository is covered by a tsconfig.json file as part of CI. * tests typescript migration (#31234) * add typescript support for functional tests * [ts][ftr] improve types for ftr and expect.js, cleanup changes to tsconfig files (#31948) In #31234 there were some extra changes that I've reverted, like use of the `tsconfig-paths` package to magically rewrite import statements to defy the standard node module resolution algorithm, the inclusion of several unnecessary options in the `test/tsconfig.json` file, and changes of the line-endings in the config files. This also brings a few enhancements from #30190 including a modularized version of the expect.js types, and options for explicit mappings for the PageObjects and services used in ftr tests. # Conflicts: # src/functional_test_runner/lib/config/schema.js # test/common/services/es.ts # test/functional/page_objects/index.ts # test/functional/services/apps_menu.js # yarn.lock
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Summary
Add typescript support for functional tests.
Checklist
Use
strikethroughsto remove checklist items you don't feel are applicable to this PR.For maintainers