[5.6] Added test helper to assert that a Job has been queued with a Chain#23531
Merged
taylorotwell merged 1 commit intolaravel:5.6from Mar 14, 2018
Merged
[5.6] Added test helper to assert that a Job has been queued with a Chain#23531taylorotwell merged 1 commit intolaravel:5.6from
taylorotwell merged 1 commit intolaravel:5.6from
Conversation
GrahamCampbell
changed the title
fadhirulhilmi
approved these changes
Mar 14, 2018
Member
|
Extracted a few methods out and did some formatting. Thanks. |
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
This PR adds a new test helper when testing Jobs and allows to check if a Job was pushed with a specific Chain. The expectedChain can be an Array of Classes or Array of Objects.
This PR is a continuation of #23381 and addresses @taylorotwell concerns on checking only for the first Job. This PR tries to fix that situation.
This PR is also a continuation of #23508 in regards of pushing the change to branch 5.6 instead of master as @taylorotwell suggested
Cheers.