These tests don't use the browser to send emails since commit e21588ec1.
However, note that this commit actually actually decreased our test
coverage somehow; since then, we're no longer testing whether we send an
email to the author after clicking the "Publish comment" button. We
might need to add a test for this in the `spec/system/comments_spec.rb`
file... but that's a story for another time.
Note we need to stub the `deliver_later` method; otherwise,
`open_last_email` would raise an exception since no email would have
been delivered.
We're moving them now because these tests use the `open_last_email`
method, and we're looking for places where using this method might
result in a flaky test when used inside a system test.
These tests were testing mailer methods, but were inside a file for
system tests.
We're moving them now because these tests use the `open_last_email`
method, and we're looking for places where using this method might
result in a flaky test when used inside a system test.
These tests were testing model methods, but were inside files for system
tests.
We're moving them now because these tests use the `open_last_email`
method, and we're looking for places where using this method might
result in a flaky test when used inside a system test.
This way it's more clear what the user experience is during the process.
Note this did not result in flaky tests, since the tests continue by
clicking links, that are only present after the request has finished.
However, we're adding expectations so we don't have to think whether the
tests could be flaky and because this way we're also testing the user
experience; it would be strange for a user if they were redirected to a
page without a flash message.
Quoting from commit 57bda006b5:
> When clicking the button "Search", the link "newest" is already
> present, so capybara might click the "newest" link before the "Search"
> request is finished, leading to unexpected results.
>
> Checking the page to make sure the "Search" request has finished
> before clicking the "newest" link solves the problem.
We're doing the same thing for the other tests that click the "Search"
button and then clicked on a link. We're also making sure the language
selector changes before clicking it again.
In most tests calling this method, we were doing another visit right
after calling this method, so by removing this `visit` call we're making
the tests slightly faster and easier to follow.
We weren't checking that the request caused by clicking on the "Send
instructions" button had finished before continuing with the test.
Perhaps that's why this test has recently failed on our CI:
```
3) Emails Reset password
Failure/Error: email = open_last_email
RuntimeError:
No email has been sent!
```
We're also adding an expectation to the `login_as_manager` method and
the methods to submit proposal and investment forms to make sure that,
when these method finish, the request finishes as well.
This way we're 100% sure we won't have simultaneous requests since the
test will wait for one request to finish before continuing.
In the debates spec, we're also making sure the expectations between the
two consecutive visits are different.
There were many cases where we were clicking on a link or (most of the
time) a button and then calling the `visit` method. In the past, it
worked just fine because clicking on buttons usually results in non-AJAX
requests, meaning that the test waited for the request to finish before
continuing.
That's no longer the case, though. In the last few months/years (not
sure since when) we're getting sporadic failures because the test
doesn't wait for the request to finish before making another request
with the `visit` method. This sometimes results in flaky tests.
Some of these tests have recently failed in our CI. Here are a few
examples (note the numbers don't follow an order because these tests
failed in different jobs):
```
1) Admin edit translatable records Current locale translation does not
exist For ActivePoll Shows first available fallback
Failure/Error: expect(page).to have_content "Sondage en Français"
expected to find text "Sondage en Français" in "Language: \n
\nEnglish\nDeutsch\nEspañol\nFrançais\nNederlands\nPortuguês
brasileiro\n中文\n Go back to CONSUL DEMOCRACY\nCONSUL
DEMOCRACY\nADMINISTRATION\nMenu\nNotifications\nMy content\nMy
account\nSign out\nProposals\nDebates\nComments\nPolls\n
Collaborative Legislation\nParticipatory budgets\nVoting booths
\nSignature Sheets\nMessages to users\nSite content\nModerated
content\nProfiles\nStatistics\nSettings\nProposals dashboard\n×
\nPolls description updated successfully.\nList of polls\nPolls
description\nCreate poll\nThere are no polls."
2) Public area translatable records Existing records Update a
translation With valid data Changes the existing translation
Failure/Error: expect(page).to have_field "Debate title",
with: "Title in English"
expected to find field "Debate title" that is not disabled but
there were no matches
2) Admin collaborative legislation Update Edit milestones summary
Failure/Error: expect(page).to have_content "There is still a long
journey ahead of us"
expected to find text "There is still a long journey ahead of us"
in "Language: \n
\nEnglish\nDeutsch\nEspañol\nFrançais\nNederlands\nPortuguês
brasileiro\n中文\n Go back to CONSUL DEMOCRACY\nCONSUL
DEMOCRACY\nADMINISTRATION\nMenu\nNotifications\nMy content\nMy
account\nSign out\nProposals\nDebates\nComments\nPolls\n
Collaborative Legislation\nParticipatory budgets\nVoting booths
\nSignature Sheets\nMessages to users\nSite content\nModerated
content\nProfiles\nStatistics\nSettings\nProposals dashboard\n×
\nProcess updated successfully. Click to visit\nBack\nAn example
legislation process\nInformation\nHomepage\nDebate\nProposals\n
Drafting\nFollowing\n1 language in use\nCurrent language\n
English\nSummary\n Format\n ◢\n Milestone\nManage progress
bars\nDon't have defined milestones\nCreate new milestone".
(However, it was found 1 time including non-visible text.)
3) Admin collaborative legislation SDG related list create Collaborative
Legislation with sdg related list
Failure/Error:
within("tr", text: "Legislation process with SDG related content") do
expect(page).to have_css "td", exact_text: "17"
end
Capybara::ElementNotFound:
Unable to find css "tr"
4) Valuation budget investments Valuate Feasibility can be marked as
pending
Failure/Error: expect(find("#budget_investment_feasibility_undecided"))
.not_to be_checked
Capybara::ElementNotFound:
Unable to find css "#budget_investment_feasibility_undecided"
3) Custom information texts Show custom texts instead of default ones
Failure/Error:
within("#section_help") do
expect(page).to have_content "Custom help with debates"
expect(page).not_to have_content "Help with debates"
end
4) Admin budgets Update Deselect all selected staff
Failure/Error: expect(page).to have_link "Select administrators"
expected to find link "Select administrators" but there were no
matches
3) Admin polls SDG related list edit poll with sdg related list
Failure/Error:
within("tr", text: "Upcoming poll with SDG related content") do
expect(page).to have_css "td", exact_text: "17"
end
Capybara::ElementNotFound:
Unable to find css "tr"
4) Admin polls SDG related list create poll with sdg related list
Failure/Error:
within("tr", text: "Upcoming poll with SDG related content") do
expect(page).to have_css "td", exact_text: "17"
end
Capybara::ElementNotFound:
Unable to find css "tr"
5) Admin custom images Image is replaced on admin newsletters
Failure/Error:
within(".newsletter-body-content") do
expect(page).to have_css("img[src*='logo_email_custom.png']")
end
Capybara::ElementNotFound:
Unable to find css ".newsletter-body-content"
6) Admin custom images Image is replaced on front views
Failure/Error:
within("#map") do
expect(page).to
have_css("img[src*='custom_map.jpg'][alt='Districts list']")
end
Capybara::ElementNotFound:
Unable to find css "#map"
```
Our tests are failing fairly consistently on CI. We
believe that this started when the most recent Github Actions
ubuntu-latest image was released[1]. Though, we don't 100% understand
why. There's some speculation[2] that the root of the issue has
something to do with Chrome/Chromedriver version 134 (which is the
version bundled with that new ubuntu-latest).
[1]: https://github.com/actions/runner-images PR#11761
[2]: https://github.com/teamcapybara/capybara Issue#2800
We've largely copied what the signon team did to get
their CI back up-and-running[^3].
[^3]: https://github.com/alphagov/signon PR#3663
In this commit we remove the version of Chrome that the
actions/runner-images image bundles for us, so that Selenium
doesn't try to use it and install an old version of Chrome and
Chromedriver.
We update the texts in Spanish ourselves, just like we update the
English texts. However, every time we get a pull request to update
translations from Crowdin, we get a bunch of texts in Spanish that we
ignore.
Hopefully excluding the Spanish language will solve the issue.
This way we're also checking mistakes like closing tags that don't match
their opening element, which we detected by manually running HTML
Beautifier with the `-e` option, and fixed two commits ago.
Note there was a false positive in the mailer layout. We don't know the
cause. Maybe closing the ERB tag right before the HTML opening tag and
the lack of other attributes on the tag made HTML Beautifier think the
tag wasn't correctly open, but on the other hand, we have the exact same
line in other layouts where HTML Beautifier works fine. We're fixing it
by adding an HTML id attribute to the element.
We had inconsistent indentation in many places. Now we're fixing them
and adding a linter to our CI so we don't accidentally introduce
inconsistent indentations again.
In some places, we accidentally opened the same tag twice instead of
closing it, while in some other places we closed a tag without opening
it in the first place.
We've detected these issues thanks to the HTML Beautifier gem, which
we're about to start using for indentation purposes.
Using an `if..else` block made the code harder to follow since the
opening tag was inside the block but the closing tag was outside it.
Moreover, it didn't work well with HTML Beautifier (a gem we're going to
introduce to manage ERB indentations).
This way we simplify the HTML, which had some `if...else` blocks that
were hard to follow because there were opening tags inside these blocks
while the closing tags were outside these blocks.
We're also making the CSS container-dependent instead of
window-dependent. Since there are between one and three elements inside
the panel, we accomplish this by making the element with the content
take its own line if the width of the panel is smaller than 35rem.
Note we're trying to keep the layout similar to what it was; since we're
no longer using negative margins (like the ones in the `.row` selector),
the votes element now gets a width of 22.5% instead of 25%.
Also note we're using the column-gap property for flexbox because the
`flex-with-gap` mixin doesn't work so well with elements that have
borders. Since the column-gap property for flexbox is now supperted by
more than 98% of the browsers (which wasn't the case when we started
using the `flex-with-gap` mixin), the `flex-with-gap` mixin has become
obsolete.
Finally, note we're removing the `max-width: 12rem` rule in the images.
I'm not sure why we introduced this rule in the first place, and it
didn't play so well to the new layout. I considered using code like
`max-width: min(100%, 12rem)`, but, since I'm not sure why `12rem` was
there in the first place, I'm not sure whether this approach was better,
and it sure made things more complex.
Not doing so made it trickier to define a flex layout, since the
icon-successful element is given a `position: absolute`, but only for
successful proposals, while for unsuccessful proposals it was taking
the standard `position: static` value.
We're also reusing the `successful?` method instead of rewriting it in
the view, and fixing a small issue where the icon wasn't displayed for
proposals having the exact needed votes (we were using `>` instead of
`>=` in the condition).
Note that legislation proposals use the method
`Proposal.votes_needed_for_success`, which is probaby a mistake caused
by copying the code from the proposal view. Fixing this issue is out of
the scope of this commit (and pull request), though.
With the multiline condition, HTML Beautifier (which we're about to
introduce in order to manage ERB indentation) gets confused. In this
context, a one-line condition is also more readable.
We had some duplication because the `css_for_process_header` was using
an instance variable, and so it couldn't be called from a partial where
this instance variable wasn't available.
Using a local variable and passing it as a parameter (as we should
always do) solves the issue and lets us simplify the code.
We now strongly recommend to upgrade one version at a time and to run
the tests before and after upgrading.
Note we use a `release` branch instead of an `upgrade` branch because
we've been mentioning the `release` branch in the release notes of every
release for years.
These initializers either don't contain any code at all or contain code
that we never use. Since this was the case in most Rails applications,
they're no longer generated in new Rails applications [1].
So we're removing them as well.
[1] See pull requests 42538 and 43237 in https://github.com/rails/rails
