Unit test issues with the feedback tool

Antranig Basman antranig.basman at colorado.edu
Tue Sep 16 16:06:01 UTC 2014

Thanks for this report, Justin - can you make sure that your branch is 
updated to my pull 559 branch of Infusion, and then I'll take a look 
later today.


On 16/09/2014 10:02, Justin Obara wrote:
> Hi Antranig,
> I wonder if you would be able to provide some assistance on some issues
> that I'm having with the unit tests for the feedback tool? In trying to
> write the integration tests for the requestSummary dialog with the rest
> of the feedback tool I have encountered two issues. The work is
> currently in my FLOE-196
> <https://github.com/jobara/metadata/tree/FLOE-196> branch
> 1) When I try to verify the requests property of the requestSummary
> component's model, the modelListener doesn't seem to fire. The requests
> property is actually hooked up via the modelRelay to a dataSourceValue
> property which takes in the raw data from a pouchDB instance. The
> dataSourceValue is being properly updated, but the relay doesn't seem to
> be triggering. Note that this is only an issue in the tests. The demo
> appears to be working correctly.
> This is a link to the commented out test
> https://github.com/jobara/metadata/blob/FLOE-196/tests/components/feedback/js/feedbackTests.js#L455-L463
> The test configuration for the feedback tool can be seen here
> https://github.com/jobara/metadata/blob/FLOE-196/tests/components/feedback/js/feedbackTests.js#L36-L77
> 2) The other issue is one we talked about in the channel at the end of
> last week. Basically if both tests trees are run, they seem to be
> conflicting with each other and causing tests to fail. If the tests are
> run separately they will pass.
> https://github.com/jobara/metadata/blob/FLOE-196/tests/components/feedback/js/feedbackTests.js#L559-L560
> You had recommended that I try your FLUID-5506
> <https://github.com/fluid-project/infusion/pull/559> branch to see if
> that would solve the problem. I did try it in my branch, but without
> noticing any changes to the failing tests.
> Thanks for your help.
> Justin

More information about the fluid-work mailing list