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

Use sparse checkout for e2e tests #3984

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Dec 2, 2024
Merged

Use sparse checkout for e2e tests #3984

merged 3 commits into from
Dec 2, 2024

Conversation

yury-dubinin
Copy link
Contributor

What is the purpose of the change:

Use sparse checkout for e2e tests to save 1-2 minutes on setup.

@yury-dubinin yury-dubinin self-assigned this Dec 2, 2024
Copy link

vercel bot commented Dec 2, 2024

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name Status Preview Comments Updated (UTC)
osmosis-frontend ✅ Ready (Inspect) Visit Preview 💬 Add feedback Dec 2, 2024 3:11pm
4 Skipped Deployments
Name Status Preview Comments Updated (UTC)
osmosis-frontend-datadog ⬜️ Ignored (Inspect) Dec 2, 2024 3:11pm
osmosis-frontend-dev ⬜️ Ignored (Inspect) Dec 2, 2024 3:11pm
osmosis-frontend-edgenet ⬜️ Ignored (Inspect) Dec 2, 2024 3:11pm
osmosis-testnet ⬜️ Ignored (Inspect) Dec 2, 2024 3:11pm

Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Dec 2, 2024

Walkthrough

The changes in the TradePage class located in packages/e2e/pages/trade-page.ts focus on enhancing logging and adjusting wait times within existing methods. Specifically, a console log was added to the gotoOrdersHistory method to indicate navigation, and the wait time after clicking the orderHistoryLink was increased from 1000 milliseconds to 4000 milliseconds. These modifications aim to improve traceability and stability during operations without altering method signatures or the overall class structure.

Changes

File Path Change Summary
packages/e2e/pages/trade-page.ts Enhanced logging in gotoOrdersHistory method; increased wait time after clicking orderHistoryLink from 1000ms to 4000ms.

Suggested reviewers

  • DavideSegullo

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actionable comments posted: 1

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between d0efa9e and 9b9e582.

⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (4)
  • .github/workflows/frontend-e2e-tests.yml is excluded by !**/*.yml
  • .github/workflows/monitoring-e2e-tests.yml is excluded by !**/*.yml
  • .github/workflows/monitoring-limit-geo-e2e-tests.yml is excluded by !**/*.yml
  • .github/workflows/prod-frontend-e2e-tests.yml is excluded by !**/*.yml
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • packages/e2e/pages/trade-page.ts (1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
packages/e2e/pages/trade-page.ts (2)

68-68: LGTM: Added logging improves test observability

The added console log follows the established pattern in other methods and improves test debugging capabilities.


Line range hint 1-374: Verify PR objective alignment

The changes in this file appear to be unrelated to the PR's objective of implementing sparse checkout for e2e tests. The modifications only adjust logging and wait times in the gotoOrdersHistory method.

Let's verify if there are other relevant changes:

Comment on lines +71 to 74
await this.page.waitForTimeout(4000);
await new Promise((f) => setTimeout(f, timeout * 1000));
const currentUrl = this.page.url();
console.log(`FE opened at: ${currentUrl}`);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🛠️ Refactor suggestion

Consider addressing potential timing issues instead of increasing wait time

The timeout increase from 1000ms to 4000ms could be masking underlying timing issues. Additionally, there are multiple sequential waits that could be consolidated.

Consider these improvements:

  1. Use Playwright's built-in wait mechanisms instead of arbitrary timeouts:
-    await this.page.waitForTimeout(4000);
-    await new Promise((f) => setTimeout(f, timeout * 1000));
+    await this.page.waitForURL(/.*\/history/, { timeout: timeout * 1000 });
  1. If the increased timeout is needed due to flakiness, add a comment explaining why 4000ms is required

Committable suggestion skipped: line range outside the PR's diff.

@yury-dubinin yury-dubinin merged commit ed8b51c into stage Dec 2, 2024
35 checks passed
@yury-dubinin yury-dubinin deleted the yury/sparse-checkout branch December 2, 2024 15:32
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants