feat: added firebase module #2954
Conversation
✅ Deploy Preview for testcontainers-go ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration. |
modules/firebase/firebase.go
Outdated
| // WithRoot sets the directory which is copied to the destination container as firebase root | ||
| func WithRoot(rootPath string) testcontainers.CustomizeRequestOption { | ||
| return func(req *testcontainers.GenericContainerRequest) error { | ||
| if !strings.HasSuffix(rootPath, "/firebase") { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
question: Could you clarify why this requirement is needed?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This has been an issue a year ago. Mounting did not correctly work at that time, and if the source directory did not match the destination directory, mounting would nest the directory instead of mapping it directly.
I see that the issue has been fixed, removing.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah, my bad. The issue still exits. I wrote a failing test to exhibit the issue.
Is there something incorrect with the way I copy over the configuration?
Also, I don't think that volume mount would work in this case, because firebase emulator creates a lot of trash data in the root catalog, which in some cases can even make testing flaky (especially if using DATA_DIRECTORY as a fixture).
modules/firebase/ports.go
Outdated
| return fmt.Sprintf("%s:%s", host, port.Port()), nil | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| func (c *FirebaseContainer) UIConnectionString(ctx context.Context) (string, error) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
question: seems like lots of additional API surface area instead of just exposing ConnectionString, thoughts?
If not then we'd need comments for all the methods.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This one is a bit more tricky.
I would love to change all of these methods, and figure out a better way to configure the launched container.
Currently I ship a catalog which contains static predefined configuration for the emulator. These methods happen to match the port numbers defined in the said file.
But, in the tests that we use, we provide a completely different setup (because we don't want to boot the full emulation suite), and we have to match the port numbers in our config so that all of this works.
So a question from my side would be:
Is there a way to generate file based config during container setup? To my knowledge firebase emulator does not allow passing those values as environment variables.
I think, ideal use example would be this:
firebaseContainer, err := firebase.Run(ctx,
"ghcr.io/u-health/docker-firebase-emulator:13.29.2",
firebase.WithUI(),
firebase.WithFirestore(),
firebase.WithCache(),
)And then, helper methods XXXConnectionString would actually return meaningful errors if the emulator part was not launched.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is there a way to generate file based config during container setup?
@xytis you can take a look at the redpanda module, where there is a Go template the module is using to build the configuration file.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
After some testing on my side, I remembered why I shipped the config as a directory in the first place.
Default (and probably expected) use case for firebase projects, is to run firebase init and then use the scaffolded configuration to interact with the dependencies.
In the following commit, I've changed the behaviour of this module. It now attempts to understand the emulator configuration of your project and then boots the containerised emulator with that info.
At least in my use case, that makes sense, and when I launch the tests, I use the same project-wide config for all of them.
What does this PR do?
This module allows running firebase emulator as a testcontainer.
It does currently depend on a forked docker image, residing under my ownership. There is no official firebase emulator docker image to my knowledge.
Why is it important?
We use firebase, thought someone else might be using firebase too.