8d5b389f38
481 Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
sharanya-appsmith
|
97d5e60842
|
test: Cypress - tags added - @tag.Workspace, @tag.Datasource, @tag.JS, @tag.PropertyPane (#29704)
## Description
> Added tags to cases
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Workspace - @tag.Workspace
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ServerSide/ApiTests - @tag.Datasource
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ServerSide/Datasources - @tag.Datasource
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ServerSide/GenerateCRUD - @tag.Datasource
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ServerSide/JsFunctionExecution - @tag.JS
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ServerSide/OnLoadTests - @tag.PropertyPane
- cypress/e2e/Sanity/Datasources - @tag.Datasource
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ServerSide/QueryPane - @tag.Datasource
#### Type of change
- Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception)
>
## Testing
> /ok-to-test tags="@tag.Workspace, @tag.PropertyPane, @tag.JS"
#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [ ] Manual
- [ ] Cypress
## Checklist:
#### Dev activity
- [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
- [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [ ] My changes generate no new warnings
- [ ] 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
- [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag
#### QA activity:
- [ ] [Speedbreak
features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-)
have been covered
- [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of
interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-)
- [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other
QA members
- [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP
- [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA
Round 2
- [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **Tests**
- Enhanced test suites for Radio, Rating, and Select widgets with
metadata tags for improved categorization and filtering.
- Updated test descriptions and restructured test cases for better
clarity and organization.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
|
||
|
sharanya-appsmith
|
58a8d4334e
|
test: Cypress - added tags - @tag.Radio, @tag.Rating, @tag.TextEditor, @tag.PhoneInput, @tag.IconButton, @tag.Maps, @tag.MenuButton, @tag.Progress, @tag.Statbox (#29693)
## Description > Added tags to cases - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Modal - @tag.Modal, @tag.Widget - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Multiselect - @tag.Multiselect, @tag.Widget - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/PhoneInput - @tag.PhoneInput, @tag.Widget - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/RTE - @tag.TextEditor, @tag.Widget - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Radio - @tag.Radio, @tag.Widget - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Select - @tag.Select, @tag.Widget - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Others/StatBox_DragAndDrop_spec.js - @tag.Statbox, @tag.Widget - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Rating - @tag.Rating, @tag.Widget - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Others/Progress_spec.js - @tag.Progress, @tag.Widget - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Others/MapChart_Spec.ts - @tag.Maps, @tag.Widget #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) > ## Testing > /ok-to-test tags="@tag.Radio, @tag.TextEditor, @tag.PhoneInput, @tag.Maps" #### How Has This Been Tested? - [ ] Manual - [ ] Cypress ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] 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 - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Tests** - Enhanced test suites for Radio, Rating, and Select widgets with metadata tags for improved categorization and filtering. - Updated test descriptions and restructured test cases for better clarity and organization. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
sharanya-appsmith
|
31a091efdb
|
test: Cypress - added tags - @tag.Filepicker, @tag.Form, @tag.Iframe, @tag.Image, @tag.Input (#29689)
## Description
> Added tags to
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Filepicker - @tag.Filepicker
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Form - @tag.Form
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Iframe - @tag.Iframe
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Image - @tag.Image
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Input - @tag.Input
#### Type of change
- Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception)
## Testing
> /ok-to-test tags="@tag.Widget"
> /ok-to-test tags="@tag.Filepicker ,@tag.Image"
#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [ ] Manual
- [ ] Cypress
## Checklist:
#### Dev activity
- [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
- [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [ ] My changes generate no new warnings
- [ ] 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
- [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag
#### QA activity:
- [ ] [Speedbreak
features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-)
have been covered
- [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of
interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-)
- [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other
QA members
- [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP
- [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA
Round 2
- [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **Refactor**
- Enhanced test suites with tags for better categorization and
searchability.
- Improved test descriptions and reordered test steps for clarity.
- Updated test suites to use arrow functions for consistency.
- **Tests**
- Expanded test coverage for file picker widgets, including additional
file formats.
- Added new test cases for form widget functionalities and validations.
- Refined iframe widget tests to verify different aspects separately.
- Adjusted image widget tests and input widget tests for improved
validation and functionality checks.
- **Chores**
- Updated tags.js file to reflect the latest tagging conventions for
tests.
- **Style**
- Standardized formatting across various test suites to maintain code
cleanliness and readability.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
|
||
|
sharanya-appsmith
|
59f4d9d422
|
test: Cypress - added tags - @tag.JS, @tag.Perf, @tag.Settings, @tag.PropertyPane, @tag.Theme (#29682)
## Description > Added tags to cases in - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/PropertyPane - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/ThemingTests - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Refactoring - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/ProductRamps - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Performance - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/PeekOverlay #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## Testing > /ok-to-test tags="@tag.JS, @tag.Perf, @tag.Settings, @tag.PropertyPane, @tag.Theme" #### How Has This Been Tested? - [ ] Manual - [ ] Cypress ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] 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 - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Tests** - Enhanced test categorization with the addition of tags for better filtering and identification across various test suites. - Improved readability and maintenance of test cases through reformatting and restructuring. - Updated test suite options for improved test coverage and identification. - **Refactor** - Optimized test setup and execution logic for several feature-related test suites. - **Bug Fixes** - Adjusted test cases to accurately reflect application behavior, particularly in toast message validation and property setting scenarios. - **Documentation** - Added comments for clarity in test code to aid in understanding test case intent and functionality. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
sharanya-appsmith
|
78514dcbac
|
test: Cypress - tag - @tag.MobileResponsive (#29678)
## Description > Added tags to cases in - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/MobileResponsiveTests/ #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## Testing > /ok-to-test tags="@tag.MobileResponsive" #### How Has This Been Tested? - [ ] Manual - [ ] Cypress ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] 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 - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Tests** - Enhanced mobile responsiveness test suites with additional tags and assertions to ensure consistent behavior across various devices. - Improved test structure for clarity and better simulation of user interactions on mobile viewports. - Increased coverage for widget dimension validations after viewport changes. - **Refactor** - Reorganized test cases and logic for a more streamlined testing process. - **Documentation** - Updated test descriptions and added comments for better understanding of test purpose and functionality. - **Chores** - Adjusted test suite setups and teardowns for optimized test execution. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
sharanya-appsmith
|
0b4fe0dd10
|
test: Cypress - added tags - @tag.JSONForm, @tag.List, @tag.Widget (#29690)
## Description > Added tags to cases - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/JSONForm - @tag.JSONForm, @tag.Widget - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/List - @tag.List, @tag.Widget - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/ListV2 - @tag.List, @tag.Widget #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) > ## Testing > /ok-to-test tags="@tag.JSONForm, @tag.List" #### How Has This Been Tested? - [ ] Manual - [ ] Cypress ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] 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 - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Refactor** - Enhanced testing suites for the JSON Form and List widgets with improved categorization and readability. - Improved test cases for field visibility, disabling, default values, and widget functionality across various components. - **Tests** - Added new test cases to cover additional scenarios for JSON Form fields and List widget interactions. - Refined existing tests to increase reliability and coverage. - **Documentation** - Updated test suite descriptions with tags for better organization and clarity. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
sharanya-appsmith
|
bae69cddb4
|
test: Cypress - @tag.Video, @tag.Container, @tag.Switch, @tag.Slider, @tag.Tab, @tag.Table, @tag.Select (#29698)
## Description > Added tags to cases - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/ContainerTest2_spec.ts - @tag.Container, @tag.Widget - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Switch - @tag.Switch @tag.Widget - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Sliders - @tag.Slider, @tag.Widget - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Tab - @tag.Tab, @tag.Widget - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/TableV1 - @tag.Table, @tag.Widget - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/TableV2, @tag.Widget - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Video, @tag.Widget - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/TreeSelect - @tag.Select, @tag.Widget #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) > ## Testing > /ok-to-test tags="@tag.Container, @tag.Video, @tag.Table, @tag.Switch" #### How Has This Been Tested? - [ ] Manual - [ ] Cypress ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] 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 - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Tests** - Enhanced test suites for Radio, Rating, and Select widgets with metadata tags for improved categorization and filtering. - Updated test descriptions and restructured test cases for better clarity and organization. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
sharanya-appsmith
|
f5fdec13f6
|
test: Cypress - added tags - @tag.Audio, @tag.Button, @tag.Camera, @tag.Chart and @tag.Widget (#29685)
## Description > Added tags - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Audio - @tag.Audio, @tag.Widget - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Button - @tag.Button, @tag.Widget - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Camera - @tag.Camera, @tag.Widget - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Chart - @tag.Chart, @tag.Widget #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## Testing > /ok-to-test tags="@tag.Widget" > /ok-to-test tags="@tag.Camera" #### How Has This Been Tested? - [ ] Manual - [ ] Cypress ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] 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 - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Tests** - Enhanced test suites for Audio Recorder, Button, Camera, and Chart widgets with additional assertions and validations. - Added new test cases for various widget properties and events, including style properties, form settings, and camera modes. - Reorganized and reformatted existing test suites for improved readability and maintainability. - **Documentation** - Updated test descriptions to include tags for better categorization and traceability. - **Bug Fixes** - Modified test logic to ensure thorough verification of widget functionalities and event triggers. - **Refactor** - Reorganized test cases into individual `it` blocks for clarity. - Adjusted test control flows for more precise behavior validation. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
sharanya-appsmith
|
d8a818686e
|
test: Cypress - added tags - @tag.Settings, @tag.Binding (#29684)
## Description > Added tags - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/UserProfile/ - @tag.Settings - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/VisualTests/ - @tag.Settings - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Walkthrough/ - @tag.Binding #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## Testing >/ok-to-test tags="@tag.Settings, @tag.Binding" #### How Has This Been Tested? - [ ] Manual - [ ] Cypress ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] 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 - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Tests** - Enhanced the "Update User Picture" end-to-end test to include checks for "Remove" text and file upload functionality. - Introduced a new test case to handle and validate error messages for invalid file uploads. - Updated the "Update User's Name" test suite with a settings tag for better categorization. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
sharanya-appsmith
|
2802efcbb2
|
test: Cypress - added tags - @tag.IDE, @tag.JS (#29674)
## Description > Added tags to cases in - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/IDE - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/JSObject #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## Testing > /ok-to-test tags="@tag.IDE" #### How Has This Been Tested? - [ ] Manual - [ ] Cypress ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] 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 - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Tests** - Enhanced test suite descriptions and added categorization tags for better filtering. - Improved test code structure and added explanatory comments for increased clarity and maintainability. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
sharanya-appsmith
|
3d1828de2a
|
test: Cypress - added @tag.Checkbox, @tag.Scanner, @tag.Datepicker, @tag.DocumentViewer, @tag.CurrencyInput, @tag.Dropdown (#29687)
## Description > Added tags to - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Checkbox - @tag.Checkbox, @tag.Widget - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/CodeScanne - @tag.Scanner, @tag.Widget - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/CurrencyInput - @tag.CurrencyInput, @tag.Widget - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Datepicker - @tag.Datepicker, @tag.Widget - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/DocumentViewer - @tag.DocumentViewer, @tag.Widget - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Dropdown - @tag.Dropdown, @tag.Widget #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## Testing > /ok-to-test tags="@tag.Widget" > /ok-to-test tags="@tag.Scanner,@tag.Checkbox" #### How Has This Been Tested? - [ ] Manual - [ ] Cypress ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] 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 - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed |
||
|
Valera Melnikov
|
f793fb58f0
|
fix: put wds theme provider under feature flag (#29659)
## Description Put WDS theme provider under the feature flag so that WDS don't affect prod anymore. Also fix this  **How it look like now** WDS enabled   WDS disabled   <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Refactor** - Improved feature flag naming for clarity in the app viewer settings. - Simplified theme background color application in the editor canvas. - Centralized rendering logic for editor canvas components for better maintainability. - **Style** - Streamlined the application of themes to ensure consistent background colors across the platform. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
sharanya-appsmith
|
a411e27b46
|
test: Cypress - added tag- @tag.Binding (#29679)
## Description > Added tags to cases in - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/OneClickBinding #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## Testing > /ok-to-test tags="@tag.Binding" #### How Has This Been Tested? - [ ] Manual - [ ] Cypress ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] 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 - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Tests** - Enhanced end-to-end test coverage with new test cases and tags for better organization. - Improved existing test cases for the JSONForm and Table widgets, including additional assertions and interactions. - Synchronized test execution with application behavior through added waits. - Expanded test scenarios for one-click binding features across various widgets and data sources. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
sharanya-appsmith
|
9aa94a2746
|
test: Cypress - added tag - @tag.AutoHeight, @tag.IDE (#29670)
## Description > Add tags to cases in - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/DynamicHeight - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/ExplorerTests - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/EmbedSettings - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Editor #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## Testing > /ok-to-test tags="@tag.AutoHeight" #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. - [ ] Manual - [ ] Cypress ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] 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 - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Refactor** - Reorganized test suite structures and added categorization tags to improve test clarity and maintainability. - **Style** - Reformatted code across multiple test files for better readability and consistency. - **Tests** - Enhanced existing test cases with additional assertions for element visibility and CSS attribute values. - Adjusted test control flows and logic for dynamic height and width validation across various widgets. - Updated test descriptions and restructured test steps to align with testing best practices. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
sharanya-appsmith
|
87a928a168
|
test: Cypess - added tags - @tag.Fork, @tag.Git (#29672)
## Description > Added tags to cases in - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Fork - client/cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Git #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## Testing >/ok-to-test tags="@tag.Fork" #### How Has This Been Tested? - [x] Manual - [x] Cypress > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] 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 - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Refactor** - Improved the structure and readability of test suites related to forking applications. - **Tests** - Enhanced test descriptions and categorization with new tags for better test management. - Added new test scenarios for forking applications by non-signed users and checking application properties post-fork. - **Chores** - Introduced new tags for test suites to facilitate automated test height adjustment and forking feature identification. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
sharanya-appsmith
|
d0de9c2fbe
|
test: Cypress - added tags - @tag.Git, @tag.JS, @tag.Binding, @tag.Datasource, @tag.ImportExport (#29516)
Renamed testcases starting with Bug to appropriate Feature_Bug eg DS_Bug, JS_Bug etc. and tagged them. Reverted the airgap change made to 1. cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/AdminSettings/Admin_settings_spec.js 2. cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Autocomplete/Bugs_AC_Spec.ts Run Binding test cases -` /ok-to-test tags="@tag. Binding"` Run JS test cases - `/ok-to-test tags="@tag.JS"` Run ImportExport test cases - ` /ok-to-test tags="@tag.ImportExport"` Run Binding test cases - `/ok-to-test tags="@tag.Binding"` Few more datasource testcases added - `/ok-to-test tags="@tag.Datasource"` To run both Git and Datasource tagged testcases -` /ok-to-test tags="@tag.Datasource,@tag.Git"` > #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## Testing > Ran ok to test with multiple tags #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [x] Manual - [x] Cypress > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] 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 - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Tests** - Enhanced test suite descriptions with relevant tags for better categorization and filtering. - Added new test cases for various bug verifications, ensuring features like datasource interactions, API executions, and widget bindings work as expected. - Improved existing test cases with additional steps and assertions to cover more scenarios and edge cases. - **Bug Fixes** - Implemented test cases to verify fixes for specific bugs related to data source configurations, JavaScript object parsing, and UI component behaviors. - **Documentation** - Updated test descriptions to provide clearer context and objectives for each test suite. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
Aishwarya-U-R
|
b7b2e49966
|
test: Cypress | Replace static with Dynamic waits - Part IV (#29641)
## Description
- This PR removes static wait from below
'app/client/cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/**' & replaces with
dynamic checks as needed:
- /AuditLogs/Audit_logs_spec.js
- /Autocomplete/Autocomplete_setters_spec.ts
- /Autocomplete/BracketNotation_AC_spec.ts
- /Autocomplete/Bugs_AC_Spec.ts
- /Autocomplete/JS_AC1_spec.ts
- /Autocomplete/JS_AC2_spec.ts
- /Autocomplete/PropertyPaneSuggestion_spec.ts
- /Autocomplete/autocomplete_spec.ts
- /Branding/Branding_spec.js
- /Debugger/Widget_property_navigation_spec.ts
- Flaky fix to move to TED(from Users) & remove wait in
Widgets/Chart/Chart_Widget_Loading_spec.js
- Dynamic wait add - ClientSide/SetProperty/SetOptions_Spec.ts
#### Type of change
- Script fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
## Testing
>
#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [X] Cypress CI runs
## Checklist:
#### QA activity:
- [X] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **Tests**
- Optimized test flows by removing unnecessary wait times, improving
test reliability and execution speed.
- Skipped certain test suites and cases, likely due to ongoing
development or identified issues requiring attention.
- Updated test cases to reflect new functionalities and ensure proper
synchronization during test execution.
- **Chores**
- Adjusted the list of limited tests, refining the focus of the test
suite for more targeted testing.
- **Documentation**
- Updated test descriptions and comments to better reflect their purpose
and the importance of specific actions within the tests.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
|
||
|
Aishwarya-U-R
|
c1487a6125
|
test: Cypress | Replace static with Dynamic waits - Part III (#29582)
## Description
- This PR removes static wait from below:
- ClientSide/ActionExecution/*** & add dynamic waits as needed in below
specs:
- /ActionSelector_JsToNonJSMode_1_spec.ts
- /Error_handling_spec.ts
- /NavigateTo1_spec.ts
- /PostWindowMessage_spec.ts
- /disableJSToggle_spec.ts
- /setInterval_spec.js
- /uiToCode_spec.ts
- ClientSide/AdminSettings/Admin_settings_spec.js
- ClientSide/AppNavigation/**
- /AppNavigationWithMultiplePages_spec.ts
- /AppNavigation_spec.ts
- /Sidebar_spec.ts
- /TopInline_spec.ts
- /TopStacked_spec.ts
#### Type of change
- Script fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
## Testing
>
#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [X] Cypress CI runs
## Checklist:
#### QA activity:
- [X] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **Tests**
- Enhanced the reliability of Cypress end-to-end tests by replacing
fixed sleep times with dynamic element visibility checks.
- Streamlined test execution by removing unnecessary wait commands.
- Improved test descriptions and ordering for better clarity and test
suite organization.
- Updated limited test configurations to reflect the current focus of
regression testing.
- **Chores**
- Adjusted the build workflow to optimize the test matrix based on the
type of GitHub event trigger.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
|
||
|
Favour Ohanekwu
|
0c4586a64c
|
fix: defer data update for js objects (#29564)
## Description This PR defers the update of JS Action's execution data #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #29566 #### Type of change - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [ ] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] 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 - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Refactor** - Improved the execution timing of internal functions to enhance app performance and responsiveness. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
Aishwarya-U-R
|
6343e568df
|
test: Cypress | Replace static with Dynamic waits - Part II (#29557)
## Description
- This PR removes hard wait from - cypress/e2e/Regression/Apps/ folder
specs & fix as needed:
- /Apps/CommunityIssues_Spec.ts
- /Apps/[EchoApiCMS_spec.js
- /Apps/ImportExportForkApplication_spec.js
- /Apps/MongoDBShoppingCart_spec.ts
- /Apps/PgAdmin_spec.js
- /Apps/PromisesApp_spec.js
- This PR also removes Users mock ds dependency from below specs (using
TED instead)
- ClientSide/Widgets/ListV2/ListV2_PageNo_PageSize_spec.js
- ClientSide/Widgets/ListV2/Listv2_BasicServerSideData_spec.js
- Fixes Sanity/Datasources/MockDBs_Spec.ts - for record count validation
#### Type of change
- Script fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
## Testing
#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [X] Cypress CI runs
## Checklist:
#### QA activity:
- [X] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **Tests**
- Enhanced test reliability by removing hardcoded delays and utilizing
dynamic waits.
- Improved test maintainability by centralizing element interactions
through a custom helper.
- Streamlined test setup for database interactions, removing
environment-specific conditions.
- Updated test file paths to reflect the new structure and focus areas.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
|
||
|
Aman Agarwal
|
a6926a4fed
|
fix: sorting schema options alphabetically (#29460) | ||
|
Aishwarya-U-R
|
a3baa9969d
|
test: Cypress | Flaky fix | Replace static waits - GitSyncedApps_spec.js (#29514)
## Description - This PR removes hard wait & flaky fix from spec: ClientSide/Git/GitSync/GitSyncedApps_spec.js #### Type of change - Script update (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) ## Testing #### How Has This Been Tested? - [X] Cypress CI runs ## Checklist: #### QA activity: - [X] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Tests** - Adjusted test logic for currency input handling in regression tests. - Renamed test specifications for clarity. - Enhanced table widget API binding and pagination tests. - Skipped certain test suites for older app imports and admin settings. - **Chores** - Updated the git fetch command in the build workflow for better repository syncing. - **Documentation** - No user-facing documentation changes. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
Aishwarya UR
|
adf159bfd6 |
Revert "skip"
This reverts commit
|
||
|
Aishwarya UR
|
e3699382b5 | skip | ||
|
Rudraprasad Das
|
c6f26918dc
|
feat: ui for autocommit (#29441)
## Description - Adds a button to enable/disable auto-commit in Git Settings - Adds loading state for auto-commit #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #29127 #### Media <img width="694" alt="image" src="https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/8724051/628d9c93-f374-4611-9c1d-c568d3a6bed5"> #### Type of change > Please delete options that are not relevant. - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) > > > ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [ ] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] 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 - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Introduced auto-commit functionality for Git synchronization. - Added modals and status bars to manage and display auto-commit progress. - Implemented feature flags to enable or disable the auto-commit feature. - **Enhancements** - Updated Git settings to include auto-commit configuration options. - Improved user interface with new messages and warnings related to auto-commit. - **Bug Fixes** - Addressed issues with Git-related actions to ensure smoother user experience. - **Documentation** - Added user-facing messages and descriptions for the auto-commit feature. - **Refactor** - Refactored Git settings components to accommodate new auto-commit feature. - **Style** - Updated styles to support new components related to auto-commit functionality. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> --------- Co-authored-by: Aishwarya UR <aishwarya@appsmith.com> |
||
|
sharanya-appsmith
|
d287940a7d
|
test: Cypress - Added Tags to test cases - @tag.GSheet, @tag.Datasource, @tag.JS, @tag.IDE, @tag.Settings, @tag.Binding (#29471)
## Description > Adding tags to the existing test cases Run GSheet test cases - `/ok-to-test tags="@tag.GSheet"` Run JS test cases - ` /ok-to-test tags="@tag.JS"` Run IDE test cases - ` /ok-to-test tags="@tag.IDE"` Run Binding test cases - ` /ok-to-test tags="@tag.Binding"` Few datasource testcases (tags are added to few) using - ` /ok-to-test tags="@tag.Datasource"` To run both GSheet and Datasource tagged testcases -` /ok-to-test tags="@tag.Datasource,@tag.GSheet"` To run both Binding and IDE tagged testcases - ` /ok-to-test tags="@tag.Binding,@tag.IDE"` To run both Binding, IDE, JS tagged testcases - ` /ok-to-test tags="@tag.Binding,@tag.IDE,@tag.JS"` #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## Testing #### How Has This Been Tested? - [x] Manual - [x] Cypress #### Test Plan > ok to test with tags added ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] 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 - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Enhanced test suite categorization with the addition of metadata tags for improved filtering and organization. - **Refactor** - Reorganized test suite structures for clarity and maintainability. - Updated test descriptions and assertions for better test coverage. - **Bug Fixes** - Modified test cases to include additional validation steps for bug fix verification. - **Documentation** - Updated test suite descriptions with new tags to reflect changes in testing strategies. - **Chores** - Adjusted file paths for test specifications to align with the updated testing focus. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
Aishwarya-U-R
|
fe3863eb65
|
test: Cypress | Replace static with Dynamic waits - Part 1 (#29405)
## Description
- Removed hard waits from below specs:
- Apps/CurrencyInputIssue_Spec.js
- ClientSide/Widgets/Modal/Modal_spec.ts (Fix & unskip)
- /Binding/TableV2_Widget_API_Pagination_spec.js
- Unskip - ApiTests/API_Unique_name_spec.js
- Flaky fix - TableV2_Widget_API_Pagination_spec.js
- Flaky fix - /ServerSide/QueryPane/S3_1_spec.js
- Removed empty ReusableHelper.ts
- Improved agHelper.GetElement() to include the assertion for element
presence/absence
- Modified helpers/function calls to fit the above syntax of
GetElement()
- Improved WaitUntilEleAppear(), WaitUntilEleDisappear() to use timeout
from cypress config
#### Type of change
- Script fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
## Testing
#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [X] Cypress CI runs
## Checklist:
#### QA activity:
- [X] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **Tests**
- Enhanced end-to-end test stability by replacing static waits with
dynamic element-based synchronization.
- Skipped certain test suites to streamline the testing process.
- Improved test assertions and control flow for more reliable
verification of UI components.
- **Chores**
- Updated test helper methods to support new verification strategies.
- Cleaned up unnecessary imports and inheritance in test support
classes.
- **Documentation**
- Adjusted test case descriptions to reflect the new synchronization
methods used.
- **Bug Fixes**
- Fixed issues with test synchronization that could lead to flaky test
results.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
|
||
|
Vemparala Surya Vamsi
|
6395f2ea6a
|
chore: serialising moment updates #27963 (#29354)
## Description Serialising moment updates directly, no longer making granular moment object updates. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #27963 #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? - [x] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [x] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] 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 - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Bug Fixes** - Improved error handling in certain scenarios to provide clearer feedback to users. - **New Features** - Enhanced date and time handling to ensure more reliable performance. - **Tests** - Updated automated tests to include additional wait times for better stability and accuracy. - **Documentation** - Comments within the code have been updated to better reflect the current logic for future reference. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
Hetu Nandu
|
a99bd1a1a1
|
chore: Remove back button (#29312)
## Description Removes the back button from Editor screen other than the canvas. With the new IA, this would not be needed #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #29306 #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [ ] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] 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 - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Tests** - Enhanced end-to-end test suites for Autocomplete, Git Sync, and IDE functionalities with improved UI interaction logic. - Introduced wait times in tests to better handle asynchronous UI updates. - **Refactor** - Streamlined navigation in the editor by replacing direct UI interactions with dedicated navigation methods. - Removed redundant code and improved the clarity of test scenarios. - **Chores** - Updated common locators by removing unused selectors to simplify test codebase. - **New Features** - Implemented feature flags to conditionally enable new UI components, providing a more tailored user experience. - **Documentation** - Updated internal documentation to reflect changes in test suites and feature flag usage. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
Favour Ohanekwu
|
95fa2328a8
|
fix: reset widget to default value after setter method (#29151)
## Description This PR ensures that widgets are reset to their default value after the `setValue` setter method is used to set its value #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #27119 #### Media > A video or a GIF is preferred. when using Loom, don’t embed because it looks like it’s a GIF. instead, just link to the video > > #### Type of change > Please delete options that are not relevant. - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) - Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected) - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) - This change requires a documentation update > > > ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [ ] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] 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 - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Implemented a new reset functionality for widgets, allowing users to revert to default values after changes. - Enhanced widget meta updates with a new reset action. - **Bug Fixes** - Added test cases to ensure widget reset functionality works as expected, even after asynchronous operations. - **Refactor** - Refactored evaluation logic to improve handling of widget meta updates and resets. - Improved action execution logic for resetting widget properties. - **Tests** - Expanded end-to-end regression tests to cover new reset widget functionality. - **Documentation** - Updated internal documentation to reflect new action types and evaluation processes related to widget meta updates. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> --------- Co-authored-by: Druthi Polisetty <druthi@appsmith.com> |
||
|
sharanya-appsmith
|
a1fb4ba197
|
test: Cypress - Added cypress grep library (#29259)
Leveraging the library [cypress-grep](https://github.com/cypress-io/cypress/tree/develop/npm/grep). Using this we can tag testcases with relevant tags and use it to run specific testcases. **Command to run in local:** `CYPRESS_grepTags=@tag.Binding,@tag.Git npx cypress run ` Pass the tags to CYPRESS_grepTags argument and only the test cases which has the tags passed will be picked to run. ex `@tag.Binding and @tag.Git` are the tag names here. **Tags can be added in the description on the test case like** `{ tags: ["@tag.Datasource"] }` for a single tag `{ tags: ["@tag.Datasource", "@tag.Git"] }` for multiple tags **How to run In CI** Single Tag - `/ok-to-test tags=@tag.Binding` Multiple tag - `/ok-to-test tags=@tag.Binding,@tag.Git` **TODOs in the next release:** - [ ] Add tags.ts file with all needed tags - [ ] Add tags to remaining spec files. - [ ] Fail the PR run if tags added are not from tag.ts and post the message on the same #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) - This change requires a documentation update #### How Has This Been Tested? - [x] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [x] Cypress ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [x] 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 - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [x] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [x] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Added a search functionality to the app. - **Enhancements** - Integrated search bar at the top of the `Hero` component and a `Search` component to the `App` component. - Added styles for the search bar. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> --------- Co-authored-by: Arpit Mohan <arpit@appsmith.com> |
||
|
sharanya-appsmith
|
6bb1876f5e
|
test: Cypress - Icon Button spec (#29267)
Add cy back as win.history.back() is not redirecting to the page navigated from Added wait till element - after pressing back, the case will wait for back to editor button to appear before performing any action <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Tests** - Improved the test script for the "Icon Button" widget to enhance navigation logic. - Updated test file paths to reflect the new structure for better test coverage. - Enhanced network request interception in tests for more robust testing scenarios. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
Aishwarya-U-R
|
8798b6e116
|
test: Cypress | Promises_1_spec.ts TED URL replace for flaky fix (#29276)
## Description
- This PR replaces 3rd party api's from
app/client/cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Binding/Promises_1_Spec.ts
with below changes:
-- "RandomUser" api to TED api
-- "Genderize" api to TED api
-- To guess the gender passing name, instead of country
-- "InspiringQuotes" to TED api
-- "Agify" api to TED api
-- "GetAnime" to TED echo api
#### Type of change
- Script fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
## Testing
>
#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [X] Cypress CI runs
## Checklist:
#### QA activity:
- [X] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **CI/CD Updates**
- Transitioned to using a nightly build for the test event driver in CI
workflows.
- **Test Enhancements**
- Expanded test coverage to include all test files.
- Updated test specifications to reflect new data endpoints and improved
error handling.
- **New Features**
- Introduced new data retrieval endpoints for gender, age, and random
quotes within the `DataManager`.
- **Documentation**
- Updated test documentation to align with the latest code changes and
testing strategies.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
|
||
|
Hetu Nandu
|
5ab58504a8
|
feat: Create Query asks for Page (#29253)
## Description Shows a list of pages to select when creating a query. It will only show when there are multiple pages in an app. If not, clicking the button directly creates the query in the only page. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #27961 #### Media  #### Type of change - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [x] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [x] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] 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 - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Refactor** - Streamlined the process for creating queries from the datasource editor across various test suites. - Enhanced the control flow and logic for handling data sources and queries in test scenarios. - **Bug Fixes** - Standardized the method of creating new queries after saving a datasource to improve test reliability. - Removed deprecated code and updated test cases to use the new `CreateQueryForDS` function. - **Tests** - Updated test scripts to reflect changes in datasource interaction and query creation. - Added new assertions and modified existing ones to accommodate the updated test flows. - **Chores** - Cleaned up import statements and removed unused code across multiple test files. - Commented out unused properties and methods to improve code maintainability. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
Rudraprasad Das
|
71d67185c4
|
feat: dsl migration with server (#28518)
## Description 1. Shifts DSL migration logic to @shared/dsl 2. Exposes /migrate/dsl endpoint on rts 3. Integrates RTS endpoint to backend for serving migrated pages 4. Introduces feature flag to switch between client-based and server-based on-demand migration #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #26783, #26784, #26980 #### Type of change - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [x] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [x] Jest - [x] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] 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 - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed --------- Co-authored-by: Nayan <nayan@appsmith.com> |
||
|
Hetu Nandu
|
141b92059a
|
fix: Tree Select 2 flakiness (#29223) | ||
|
Hetu Nandu
|
ca1713c73e
|
fix: Improvements to Sidebar for navigation (#29205)
## Description - Rename to Pages to Editor in the Sidebar - Move Editor to top - Update "Home" to "All apps" #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #29206 #### Media > A video or a GIF is preferred. when using Loom, don’t embed because it looks like it’s a GIF. instead, just link to the video > > #### Type of change > Please delete options that are not relevant. - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) - Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected) - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) - This change requires a documentation update > > > ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [ ] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] 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 - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed |
||
|
Hetu Nandu
|
0f3edc9b78
|
refactor: Cypress Entity Explorer Presence functions (#29154)
## Description Refactors the following functions to improve future edits - Assert Presence / Absence of Entity in Explorer - Expand Collapse Items in Explorer - Separate the Page related functions in a different file #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #29194 |
||
|
Abhinav Jha
|
666493fab9
|
fix: View mode dimension observer (#29071)
## Description - The dimension observer in auto layout was not triggering in the viewer due to the fact that the observed container did not adapt to the child contents. - This worked in the editor because the document was not in the default `position:auto` flow. - The fix was to change the `position` property to `auto` and make sure that the observed container has the height which `fit-content`. Reference: https://www.joshwcomeau.com/css/understanding-layout-algorithms/ #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #28556 #### Media #### Type of change - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) ## Testing #### How Has This Been Tested? - [x] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [x] Cypress ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [NA] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed --------- Co-authored-by: Aishwarya UR <aishwarya@appsmith.com> |
||
|
Hetu Nandu
|
08af418394
|
chore: Refactor switching segments in Entity Explorer (#29130)
## Description Refactors the Entity Explorer Segment Switch so that we can update it with more options in the future. Also removes any unnecessary Segment Switch calls Updates the structure to make Sidebar and Left Pane configurable and separate from EditorNavigation #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #28930 #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [ ] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] 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 - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed |
||
|
arunvjn
|
6c81f07e79
|
fix: deleted JSObject names are not released for later use (#29148)
## Description > Repeated refactor operations seems to leave stale JS Objects in the dataTree causing the dataTree to occupy namespace that no longer exists. This seems to have stemmed from the `updateEvalTreeWithJSCollectionState` method in app/client/src/workers/common/DataTreeEvaluator/index.ts, where we update the existing evalTree with JSObjects and their variables from the previous unEvalTree. > This PR modifies `updateEvalTreeWithJSCollectionState` to not apply variable state to evalTree if the entity is not present. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #29162 > if no issue exists, please create an issue and ask the maintainers about this first > > #### Media > A video or a GIF is preferred. when using Loom, don’t embed because it looks like it’s a GIF. instead, just link to the video > > #### Type of change - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) > > ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? - [x] Manual - [x] Cypress > > #### Test Plan - [x] Repeated renaming operations should work. - [x] Deleting a JS Object should make the name available for use. - [x] Execution data should be preserved on rename operations > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed |
||
|
arunvjn
|
56b4671baf
|
chore: sunset assistive binding (#29119)
## Description > Sunset assistive binding feature. Removes test files, assistiveBindingHinter and changes made to autocomplete behaviour > > > #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #29022 > #### Media > A video or a GIF is preferred. when using Loom, don’t embed because it looks like it’s a GIF. instead, just link to the video > > #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) > > ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? - [x] Manual > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [x] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed |
||
|
Aishwarya-U-R
|
0a37ad2fb9
|
test: Cypress | Flaky fix Git/GitSync/GitSyncedApps_spec.js & unskip (#29105)
## Description - This PR fixes the flaky app/client/cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Git/GitSync/GitSyncedApps_spec.js in CI runs & unskip #### Type of change - Script fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) ## Testing #### How Has This Been Tested? - [X] Cypress CI runs ## Checklist: #### QA activity: - [X] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed |
||
|
Favour Ohanekwu
|
ffcf12d8e5
|
fix: Remove "No action" cue in action selector (#29017) | ||
|
Hetu Nandu
|
0cd9bc6922
|
refactor: Cypress SelectEntityByName (#29012)
Refactors SelectEntityByName to allow all types of selections but makes defining the Entity Type compulsory |
||
|
Aishwarya-U-R
|
be5a66328b
|
test: Cypress | Skip test to unblock CI (#29052)
## Description - This PR skips the often failing -cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Git/ExistingApps/v1.9.24/DSCrudAndBindings_Spec.ts due to open bug |
||
|
arunvjn
|
dee0a54227
|
fix: Preserve query execution data on name refactor (#28973)
## Description Code changes to preserve execution data when a Query/JS Object is renamed. > #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #28985 > > #### Media > A video or a GIF is preferred. when using Loom, don’t embed because it looks like it’s a GIF. instead, just link to the video > > #### Type of change - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) > > > ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? - [x] Manual - [x] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed |
||
|
Aishwarya UR
|
57c33e4698 | run all | ||
|
sharanya-appsmith
|
12283892dc
|
test: Cypress - skipping flaky cases in ce (#28959)
Skipping below caswes 1. GitSyncedApps_spec.js 2. Modal_spec.ts |
||
|
balajisoundar
|
856d2ad812
|
feat: [Table Widget] Allow moment date formats in input and display d… (#28784)
#### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/18572 > if no issue exists, please create an issue and ask the maintainers about this first > > #### Media > A video or a GIF is preferred. when using Loom, don’t embed because it looks like it’s a GIF. instead, just link to the video > > #### Type of change > Please delete options that are not relevant. - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) - Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected) - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) - This change requires a documentation update > > > ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [ ] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] 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 - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed |
