Note that the click_link "Reply" is now inside a "within".
This is due to the case of "legislation_annotation" before in the original test
no comment was created as it simply took the one created by default when creating
a "legislation_annotation".
```
annotation = create(:legislation_annotation, author: citizen)
comment = annotation.comments.first
```
Now to try to unify this test, we always create a comment, and in this case as we
also created the "legislation_annotation" we have 2 comments, so it is necessary
to add the "click_link" inside the "within".
Note that the click_link "Reply" is now inside a "within".
This is due to the case of "legislation_annotation" before in the original test
no comment was created as it simply took the one created by default when creating
a "legislation_annotation".
```
annotation = create(:legislation_annotation, author: citizen)
comment = annotation.comments.first
```
Now to try to unify this test, we always create a comment, and in this case as we
also created the "legislation_annotation" we have 2 comments, so it is necessary
to add the "click_link" inside the "within".
Note that the click_link "Reply" is now inside a "within".
This is due to the case of "legislation_annotation" before in the original test
no comment was created as it simply took the one created by default when creating
a "legislation_annotation".
```
comment = annotation.comments.first
```
Now to try to unify this test, we always create a comment, and in this case as we
also created the "legislation_annotation" we have 2 comments, so it is necessary
to add the "click_link" inside the "within".
Note that the click_link "Reply" is now inside a "within".
This is due to the case of "legislation_annotation" before in the original test
no comment was created as it simply took the one created by default when creating
a "legislation_annotation".
```
annotation = create(:legislation_annotation, author: citizen)
comment = annotation.comments.first
```
Now to try to unify this test, we always create a comment, and in this case as we
also created the "legislation_annotation" we have 2 comments, so it is necessary
to add the "click_link" inside the "within".
Note that, in all cases except in :legislation_annotation, the behavior for
click_link is now slightly different.
Previously, the click_link outsite of within block meant that we made sure there
was only one link with that text in the whole page. Now, in order to unify this
spec we change the behaviour.
After commit 52ec5094f, we started to get a warning when running out
test suite:
```
WARNING: The #<Class:0x00007958c06fb8e0> component rendered HTML-unsafe
output. The output will be automatically escaped, but you may want to
investigate.
```
The reason is that, for security reasons, since version 3.9.0,
ViewComponent no longer renders unsafe output in the `call` method, so
we need to make sure the rendered text is safe. This is similar to what
Rails automatically does in views with `<%= %>`.
While this change doesn't affect the application (this class is only
used in a test), with it we avoid the warning.
So now we know where to use the `where.missing` method which was
introduced in Rails 6.1.
Note this rule didn't detect all cases where the new method can be used.
Even though we're already applying this rule since commit 08b12a78f,
it's very useful to have it so we don't accidentally introduce code that
won't work with Rails 7.
After upgrading to Rails 7, this rule will no longer be necessary, since
the code using the deprecated syntax will not work and so we'll notice
it immediately.
This link used to open in a new window, and we accidentally changed that
behavior while refactoring it in commit c2710de5f.
Since we're adding a test for this case, and the Proposals::NewComponent
class is similar, we're adding a test for that class too. In the case of
proposals, we need to sign in a user because the proposals form contains
fields to attach image, that currently rely on a user being signed in.
This test is failing often due to an "Unable to autoload constant"
error, that will be fixed after switching to zeitwerk.
Just like it happened in the the "Polls can be listed" test, the reason
seems to be accessing a page containing several ActiveStorage
attachments. However, since this test only makes sense when two or more
images are displayed on the page, we can't change the test so create
just one image.
So, for now, we're commenting the test, and we'll uncomment it again
when we enable zeitwerk in version 2.2.0.
Code Climate was failing to analyze our repo because their rubocop 1.31
doesn't support rubocop-capybara.
Since we're using rubocop 1.56.4 in our code, we're going to use
version 1.56.3 for Code Climate which, at the time of writing, is the
latest available version in Code Climate.
