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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

test: first happy path #708

Merged
merged 13 commits into from
Sep 15, 2020
Merged

test: first happy path #708

merged 13 commits into from
Sep 15, 2020

Conversation

isabelcosta
Copy link
Member

@isabelcosta isabelcosta commented Aug 3, 2020 •
edited
Loading

Description

I am creating the first user journey test following the scenario described in the issue:

Scenario: User A (mentor) and User B (mentee) sending 
a mentorship request until the mentee completes a task

- User B (mentee) sends a request to User A (mentor)
- User A (mentor) accepts request
- User A (mentor) or User B (mentee) creates a task
- User B (mentee) completes the task
- User B (mentee) comments on the task (TODO)
- User A (mentor) comments on the task (TODO)

Fixes #680

I have been formating the code using black:

black tests/user_journey/test_happy_path_1.py

Type of Change:

  • Code
  • Quality Assurance

How Has This Been Tested?

I am running the specific Happy Path 1 test standalone.

python -m unittest tests/user_journey/happy_path_1.py

Checklist:

  • My PR follows the style guidelines of this project
  • I have performed a self-review of my own code or materials
  • I have commented my code or provided relevant documentation, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
  • I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
  • Any dependent changes have been merged
  • Update Postman API at /docs folder
  • Update Swagger documentation and the exported file at /docs folder
  • Update requirements.txt

Code/Quality Assurance Only

  • My changes generate no new warnings
  • My PR currently breaks something (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
  • I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
  • New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
  • Any dependent changes have been published in downstream modules

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Aug 4, 2020 •
edited
Loading

Codecov Report

Merging #708 into develop will increase coverage by 0.14%.
The diff coverage is 98.86%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop     #708      +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage    95.84%   95.99%   +0.14%     
===========================================
  Files           95       96       +1     
  Lines         5200     5287      +87     
===========================================
+ Hits          4984     5075      +91     
+ Misses         216      212       -4
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
tests/user_journey/test_happy_path_1.py 98.86% <98.86%> (ø)
app/database/models/user.py 98.57% <0.00%> (-0.03%) ⬇️
app/api/models/user.py 100.00% <0.00%> (ø)
app/api/resources/admin.py 88.13% <0.00%> (ø)
app/api/resources/mentorship_relation.py 97.74% <0.00%> (+0.75%) ⬆️
app/api/email_utils.py 96.49% <0.00%> (+5.26%) ⬆️

@isabelcosta isabelcosta changed the title [WIP] test: first happy path test: first happy path Aug 11, 2020
@isabelcosta isabelcosta requested a review from rpattath August 11, 2020 22:41
@isabelcosta isabelcosta requested a review from SanketDG August 11, 2020 23:18
SanketDG
SanketDG reviewed Aug 12, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@SanketDG SanketDG left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This looks good! Simple and straight-forward!

I assume some work is still left?

@isabelcosta
Copy link
Member Author

@SanketDG nice question I wanted to clarify here. Yesterday in Office hours with @rpattath we agreed that for now this is a good example for other testers/developers to follow. I left the TODO, because it can be enhanced, but I am leaving this on purpose, just to have this one as an example. What do you think?

This looks good! Simple and straight-forward!

Thank you so much this is very nice to read about a PR :)

rpattath
rpattath previously approved these changes Aug 13, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@rpattath rpattath left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, thank you Isabel !

@isabelcosta isabelcosta requested review from a team, bartekpacia and SanketDG and removed request for a team August 18, 2020 17:36
SanketDG
SanketDG suggested changes Aug 19, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@SanketDG SanketDG left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good apart from a few nits!

@isabelcosta @SanketDG
docs: change test variable name
89f0607 
Co-authored-by: Sanket Dasgupta <[email protected]>
@isabelcosta isabelcosta requested a review from SanketDG August 21, 2020 01:23
@isabelcosta
Copy link
Member Author

@SanketDG done with the appropriate changes! Thank you a lot for the thoughtful review 🙌

@isabelcosta isabelcosta requested review from rpattath, foongminwong and gaurivn and removed request for bartekpacia August 21, 2020 01:23
@isabelcosta
Copy link
Member Author

I guess I have to fix this error 🤦‍♀️ but I am not sure how the run tests passed and this no...
image

rpattath
rpattath approved these changes Sep 11, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@rpattath rpattath left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

SanketDG
SanketDG approved these changes Sep 11, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@SanketDG SanketDG left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Gah, this got slipped, looks good!

@isabelcosta isabelcosta merged commit 879159a into anitab-org:develop Sep 15, 2020
@isabelcosta
Copy link
Member Author

Thank you so much @rpattath and @SanketDG for your approvals 🎉 🙌

b-thebest pushed a commit to b-thebest/mentorship-backend that referenced this pull request Mar 2, 2021
@isabelcosta @SanketDG
test: first happy path (anitab-org#708)
553d5a8 
* test: begin first happy path

* test: assert happy path 1 current relation

* style: ran black on file

* chore: remove python2 support from happy path

* test: finish base happy path 1 test

* test: verify task completeness

* test: add next verification TODOs

* test: rename first user journey test

* docs: change test variable name

Co-authored-by: Sanket Dasgupta <[email protected]>

* docs: remove comment line

* test: fix auth header used in test

* test: fix happy path

Co-authored-by: Sanket Dasgupta <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@SanketDG SanketDG SanketDG approved these changes

@rpattath rpattath rpattath approved these changes

@foongminwong foongminwong Awaiting requested review from foongminwong

@gaurivn gaurivn Awaiting requested review from gaurivn

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Create a user journey test from sending a mentorship request until the mentee completes a task
3 participants
@isabelcosta @SanketDG @rpattath