e99cc39e47
566 Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Hetu Nandu
|
e99cc39e47
|
chore: Block Selections when Canvas is in Side by Side mode (#31587)
## Description
This pull request aims to enhance the user experience within the
application by modifying the canvas behavior when it is displayed in
"Side by Side" mode alongside Queries or JavaScript sections. The key
change is the disabling of direct selections on the canvas, allowing
interactions with canvas elements only through cmd + click or by
clicking on the widget's name. This adjustment is intended to facilitate
a view-only mode for the canvas during Queries or JS editing, thereby
improving layout and user interaction.
Additionally, the PR introduces enhancements to the application's
testing framework, focusing on improving test reliability in scenarios
involving UI interaction and state changes. Notable updates include:
- Improved error tooltip handling in CurrencyInput_spec.js.
- Ensured page state saving before verifying element presence in
Listv2_BasicChildWidgetInteraction_spec.js.
- Replaced cy.wait("@updateLayout") with cy.assertPageSave() and
introduced a delay in Listv2_spec.js to accommodate functionality
changes.
- Implemented visibility checks in
TableV2_Button_Icon_validation_spec.js to prevent timing-related test
failures.
These technical updates collectively aim to bolster the application's
testing framework, enhancing the reliability and accuracy of automated
tests, especially in UI interaction and state change scenarios.
#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes #30864
## Automation
/ok-to-test tags="@tag.Widget"
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: Cypress test results -->
> [!IMPORTANT]
> Workflow run:
<https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/actions/runs/8259916944>
> Commit: `15e1cf937a9d15adaea68e16a55006d993a07cbf`
> Cypress dashboard url: <a
href="https://internal.appsmith.com/app/cypress-dashboard/rundetails-65890b3c81d7400d08fa9ee5?branch=master&workflowId=8259916944&attempt=1"
target="_blank">Click here!</a>
> All cypress tests have passed 🎉🎉🎉
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: Cypress test results -->
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **New Features**
- Added new constants for widget selection and focus management.
- Introduced a new event type for tracking widget selections in code
mode.
- **Tests**
- Enhanced test assertions and interactions for better reliability and
error handling in various widgets.
- **Refactor**
- Improved widget selection logic and URL handling for a more intuitive
user experience.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
|
||
|
Shrikant Sharat Kandula
|
1eb7f0e171
|
chore: Remove "Save theme" functionality (#31481)
This is deleting a defunct feature. [Slack thread](https://theappsmith.slack.com/archives/CGBPVEJ5C/p1709621165627549). |
||
|
Hetu Nandu
|
90760da7ca
|
feat: New IDE Top Navbar (#31594)
## Description Replaces the current App IDE Navbar with the new one. Fixes #31603 ## Automation /ok-to-test tags="@tag.All" ### 🔍 Cypress test results <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: Cypress test results --> > [!IMPORTANT] > Workflow run: <https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/actions/runs/8244382997> > Commit: `5dba98f326ce504de0bf32b56c195d615279bf69` > Cypress dashboard url: <a href="https://internal.appsmith.com/app/cypress-dashboard/rundetails-65890b3c81d7400d08fa9ee5?branch=master&workflowId=8244382997&attempt=1" target="_blank">Click here!</a> > All cypress tests have passed 🎉🎉🎉 <!-- end of auto-generated comment: Cypress test results --> <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Refactor** - Centralized page management actions in Cypress tests using the new `PageList` module. - **Tests** - Enhanced Cypress test reliability and readability by consistently using `PageList` methods for page management. - **Chores** - Optimized test support infrastructure by removing outdated commands and imports in Cypress support files. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
Abhinav Jha
|
55487f5865
|
fix: Deselect all widgets on canvas click (#31653)
## Description
Clicking on the canvas in Anvil layouts did not deselect all widgets.
This PR fixes it. Now all widgets
## Approach
In the `AnvilMainCanvas` we check if the origin of the click event is
the Main Canvas. If it is, we allow the function to deselect all widgets
to run.
## Automation
/ok-to-test tags="@tag.Anvil"
### 🔍 Cypress test results
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: Cypress test results -->
> [!CAUTION]
> If you modify the content in this section, you are likely to disrupt
the CI result for your PR.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: Cypress test results -->
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **Refactor**
- Improved the logic for clearing widget selections to enhance user
experience when interacting with the main canvas.
- **Tests**
- Added a test case to ensure clicking on the canvas deselects all
widgets and verifies the border color of widgets within the main canvas.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
|
||
|
gzlinzihong
|
85269c432c
|
fix: file picker widgets removing files causing abnormal content (#31646)
## Description > fix filepicker widgets selects multiple files and then removes one of them, causing the final content of all file.data to be abnormal > > #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes # (issue number) > [31411](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/31411) #### Type of change - Bug fix > ## 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. - 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 - My changes generate no new warnings - New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Enhanced the File Picker widget to support more interactive functionalities like setting maximum file limits and custom data formats. - **Tests** - Added tests for new functionalities in the File Picker widget, including file uploading, setting restrictions, and file removal verification. - **Bug Fixes** - Fixed an issue with file data retrieval in the File Picker widget to ensure accurate data is presented after files are removed. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> Co-authored-by: linzihong <linzihong@corp.netease.com> |
||
|
balajisoundar
|
2c7b3684d6
|
chore: [map chart widget] update the label counts and snapshot in spec (#31648)
## Description > [!TIP] > _Add a TL;DR when the description is longer than 500 words or extremely technical (helps the content team)._ > > _Please also include relevant motivation and context. List any dependencies that are required for this change. Add links to Notion, Figma or any other documents that might be relevant to the PR._ Fixes #`Issue Number` _or_ Fixes `Issue URL` > [!WARNING] > _If no issue exists, please create an issue first, and check with the maintainers if the issue is valid._ ## Automation /ok-to-test tags="@tag.Maps" ### 🔍 Cypress test results <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: Cypress test results --> > [!IMPORTANT] > Workflow run: <https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/actions/runs/8231075012> > Commit: `07f432e3206c6b370265078607b285e94eb0aacd` > Cypress dashboard url: <a href="https://internal.appsmith.com/app/cypress-dashboard/rundetails-65890b3c81d7400d08fa9ee5?branch=master&workflowId=8231075012&attempt=1" target="_blank">Click here!</a> > All cypress tests have passed 🎉🎉🎉 <!-- end of auto-generated comment: Cypress test results --> <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Tests** - Updated MapChart widget test cases, including selector changes and modified assertions. - **New Features** - Enhanced the MapChart Widget to render charts using SVG for improved performance and quality. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
sneha122
|
394093f6d5
|
fix: removed unnecessary checks for create action api in spec file (#31656)
## Description
Fixed `GlobalSeach_spec.ts` test case, it had unnecessary check for
create action API, removed that.
Fixes #`Issue Number`
_or_
Fixes `Issue URL`
> [!WARNING]
> _If no issue exists, please create an issue first, and check with the
maintainers if the issue is valid._
## Automation
/ok-to-test tags=""
### 🔍 Cypress test results
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: Cypress test results -->
> [!CAUTION]
> If you modify the content in this section, you are likely to disrupt
the CI result for your PR.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: Cypress test results -->
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **Tests**
- Updated the `navigatesToApi` test case in the Global Search feature to
refine validation criteria.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
---------
Co-authored-by: “sneha122” <“sneha@appsmith.com”>
|
||
|
sneha122
|
1da73775b8
|
chore: create action source instrumentation added (#31585)
## Description Added server side create action instrumentation for following cases: Action | Source | Frontend/Backend | Tests Added? -- | -- | -- | -- Create Action / query from any other place in app (entity explorer / datasource preview / ombinar) | self | source sent from frontend | Cypress Drag a table widget → Click connect data → Select datasource → select table → click on connect data | one-click-binding | source sent from frontend | Cypress Generate CRUD triggered from new page menu or datasource preview | generate-crud-page | source set in backend | No When page is cloned | clone-page | source set in backend | No When application is forked | fork-application | source set in backend | No #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #31173 > 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 - 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 - [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 - [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 - **New Features** - Enhanced event tracking capabilities by introducing an enumeration to track the source of action creation for analytics. - **Enhancements** - Improved action creation flow by specifying the source in various components, aiding in precise analytics and debugging. - Streamlined analytics properties method across services for consistency and simplicity. - **Bug Fixes** - Adjusted assertion logic in Cypress tests to validate the source of action creation accurately, ensuring reliability in automated testing. - **Refactor** - Simplified method signatures and logic in server-side analytics handling for better maintainability. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> --------- Co-authored-by: “sneha122” <“sneha@appsmith.com”> |
||
|
Hetu Nandu
|
98edccb970
|
chore: Add back Preview Mode shortcut (#31602)
Adds back the preview mode shortcut now with a modifier key to be `⌥ + P` on mac or `Alt + P` on windows <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Enhanced the Preview Mode with additional hotkeys (`alt + p`) for toggling, improving user experience in navigating the editor. - Improved tooltip messages for better clarity on shortcuts available to the user. - **Tests** - Updated regression tests to cover new Preview Mode functionality and ensure its reliability. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
balajisoundar
|
cf6ba4c8fd
|
chore: Remove FEATURE_FLAG release_custom_widgets_enabled (#31577)
> Pull Request Template > > Use this template to quickly create a well written pull request. Delete all quotes before creating the pull request. > ## Description > Add a TL;DR when description is extra long (helps content team) > > Please include a summary of the changes and which issue has been fixed. Please also include relevant motivation > and context. List any dependencies that are required for this change > > Links to Notion, Figma or any other documents that might be relevant to the PR > > #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes # (issue number) > 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 <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Refactor** - Removed feature flag checks and related functionality across the application, impacting widget visibility and behavior. - **Tests** - Updated test setups and cases to align with the removal of feature flag dependencies. - **Chores** - Cleaned up unused code and constants related to the now-removed feature flags. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
Ankita Kinger
|
beba3afb60
|
chore: Removing partner program callout from invite modal (#31576) | ||
|
Ashok Kumar M
|
128e7bc686
|
fix: Enable multi widget selection in Anvil (#31305)
> Pull Request Template > > Use this template to quickly create a well written pull request. Delete all quotes before creating the pull request. > ## Description Fixing Selection to allow multi selection of widgets. > #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes # (issue number) > 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 <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Refactor** - Enhanced widget selection and interaction by updating event handling across components. - Modified types to align with event handling needs. - Updated event detail objects and handling in various hooks and utilities. - **Tests** - Added new test cases for widget selection with Ctrl + Click. - Updated existing test cases for improved coverage and accuracy. - Enhanced test case descriptions for better clarity. - Introduced a new parameter in a test function for improved testing capabilities. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
Rudraprasad Das
|
ac1740aaa7
|
chore: git continuous delivery automation tests (#31131)
## Description Adds automation tests for Git continuous delivery #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #31130 #### 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 - **Refactor** - Improved the GitSync functionality for better user experience. - **New Features** - Added the ability to dynamically set test identifiers for the Copy button, enhancing testing capabilities. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
Hetu Nandu
|
1d4198048c
|
chore: Debugger Split states (#31043)
## Description Creates local states for the debugger for Query Pane, Api Pane and JS Pane and separates it from the main Canvas Debugger state. This is done so that in Split pane, the states of Action Pane debugger can be different from the Canvas Debugger state. To keep handling the Fullscreen Debugger experience, a new hook `useDebuggerTriggerClick` is introduced which opens the correct debugger based on the IDE state. Also removes the Error and Logs from the Query / Api / JS Debuggers when in split screen mode for a cleaner debugging experience ##### This change removes the expectation of having a common debugger state that follows around as the user navigates in the IDE. Instead it create a new debugger state per entity item. The tests have been updated to reflect this #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #30836 Fixes #30342 #### Media #### Type of change - Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected) ## Testing #### How Has This Been Tested? - [ ] 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 |
||
|
Rahul Barwal
|
1bcae40616
|
chore: Add spec for create new app from template (#31311)
## Description This pull request adds a cypress spec for create app from templates option. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes # (issue number) > 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 <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Enabled the creation of new applications directly from templates without the need for feature flags. - Enhanced user interface for selecting templates when creating new applications. - **Tests** - Added client-side regression tests for creating applications from templates. - **Refactor** - Streamlined the process for initiating the creation of an application from a template in the UI. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
Rahul Barwal
|
a3597acae5
|
fix: Add useEffect hook to close modal when reconnecting modal is open (#31200)
## Description This pull request adds the useEffect hook to the CreateNewAppFromTemplatesWrapper component. The useEffect hook listens for changes in the isReconnectingModalOpen state and closes the modal when it is true. This ensures that the modal is closed when the reconnecting modal is open. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes # (issue number) > 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 <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Introduced a new state to automatically close the modal when certain conditions are met, enhancing user experience. - Adjusted the control flow in the test scenario to improve accuracy. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
Aman Agarwal
|
acf51cc91b
|
feat: js enabled by default for 1 click binding (#31162) | ||
|
Aishwarya-U-R
|
30300bb6a4
|
test: Cypress | Replacing some external api's with TED + Flaky fix (#31118)
## Description - This PR does some clean up of comments - in DeployHelper.ts - This PR replaced external image api with TED mock api in ServerSide/OnLoadTests/OnLoadActions_Spec.ts - Extrenal example api to TED in Widgets/Image/Image_spec.js - Extrenal api links in app/client/cypress/e2e/Regression/ServerSide/ApiTests/API_Bugs_Spec.js to TED api's - Flaky fixes /ServerSide/LoginTests/LoginFailure_spec.js - for EE CI run failure (Added multiple Dynamic checks) - support command.js method LoginUser() - added Dynamic check - Encapsulated Datasources/Arango_Basic_Spec.ts into conditional check to run in CE alone, instead of entirely skipping, since its failing in EE due to chrome crash #### Media #### 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** - Updated Cypress regression tests to use flower images instead of cat images for API calls. - Modified limited test configurations to run with different spec files. - Adjusted GitHub Actions workflow to change `matrix_count` values based on the event type and retrieve PR number for manual triggers. - Updated Docker image tag in CI tests to `nightly`. - **Refactor** - Enhanced `DataManager` class with new properties for flower image URLs. - Improved `EntityExplorer` class method to ensure more reliable triggering of events. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
Pawan Kumar
|
55fb2ce467
|
fix: Widget Sidebar Spec (#31196)
In my last PR, I broke the widget_sidebar_spec, this PR fixes that. <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Refactor** - Updated CSS selectors in test support files for improved consistency and reliability. - **Tests** - Added the `@tag.Widget` tag to improve organization in Entity explorer tests. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> --------- Co-authored-by: Pawan Kumar <pawankumar@Pawans-MacBook-Pro-2.local> |
||
|
balajisoundar
|
29d6422922
|
fix: [custom widget] height issue in auto layout (#31176)
## Description Adds condition to stop custom widget from growing continuously in auto height #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/31170 > 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 - [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 - [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 <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Introduced dynamic layout handling in Custom Widgets to support auto layout and fixed height configurations. - **Tests** - Added automated tests to verify custom widget height adjustment in auto layout mode. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
Ashok Kumar M
|
f7d41891b8
|
fix: Anvil toggleable widgets not working when native callbacks are used for AnvilFlexComponent (#31125)
> Pull Request Template > > Use this template to quickly create a well written pull request. Delete all quotes before creating the pull request. > ## Description In last weeks effort of cleaning up Editor and Viewer parts of AnvilFlexComponent I had changed synthetic React callbacks to native ones #30780 . This has resulted in regression of widget toggling of widgets like Checkbox, Switch, etc. so changing them back to synthetic events by passing callbacks and props to the viewer part of AnvilFlexComponent. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes # (issue number) > 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 <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Introduced a new testing suite for validating widget interactions in Anvil Layout Mode, focusing on switch and checkbox widgets. - Added new functionalities for switch and checkbox widgets, including selection toggling and state verification. - Enhanced Anvil editor components to support custom click behaviors, improving widget interaction in edit mode. - **Bug Fixes** - Addressed issues with native click callbacks interfering with widget events. - **Tests** - Added comprehensive test cases for new widget functionalities and interactions. - **Refactor** - Updated internal logic for widget selection and style adjustments based on interaction states. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
Aman Agarwal
|
7ae87dc061
|
chore: added new test cases for different plugins (#31068)
## Description Added test cases for start with data flow by default. The test cases are added for : - `Postgres` : It should redirect to ds page with schema preview - `Mysql` : It should redirect to ds page with schema preview - `S3` : It should redirect to ds page with config and we can create query on top of it - `Airtable` : It should redirect to ds page with config and we can create query on top of it - `REST API` : It should redirect to action page and the action creation is successful #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #30806 > 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 <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Tests** - Expanded and refined test descriptions and cases for the "Start with data userflow," focusing on creating and saving data sources for Postgres, MySql, S3, Airtable, and Rest API actions. - **Refactor** - Modified access level of a method in the `ApiPage` class to enhance testability. - **New Features** - Introduced a new property in the `DataSources` class to improve data handling capabilities. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
Rohan Arthur
|
4af694681d
|
fix: broken line in page settings (#30951)
## Description for old pages that were created before the new url style, the page settings has a prompt to ask the user to change the URL. The line in this prompt is broken  This PR changes this line to:  For testing, you can get an example old app from [here](https://theappsmith.slack.com/archives/C02JT9CSE6L/p1707204475068809?thread_ts=1706698534.445299&cid=C02JT9CSE6L) #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #30922 #### 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) ## 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 - [ ] 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** - Updated the wording of messages related to setting page URLs for enhanced clarity and consistency. - Changed test tags from `@tag.Settings` to `@tag.Visual` for improved test categorization. - Modified JSEditor indentation visual tests to include additional test cases and adjustments in test descriptions. - Updated test tags from `@tag.JS` to `@tag.Visual` for consistency in test categorization. - Added `@tag.Visual` to the list of tags for test categorization. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> --------- Co-authored-by: Aishwarya UR <aishwarya@appsmith.com> |
||
|
Rudraprasad Das
|
5c74768afc
|
chore: remove git release feature flags (#30962)
## Description Removes git related feature flags - `release_git_connct_v2_enabled` - `release_git_status_lite_enabled` #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #30961 #### Media #### 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 - **New Features** - Enhanced Git synchronization features including better handling of workspace creation, DSL additions, and branch protection settings. - **Refactor** - Updated Git connection methods and deployment processes for improved efficiency and reliability. - Introduced new variables and methods for more precise control over Git settings and operations. - **Tests** - Added and refactored Cypress end-to-end tests to validate new Git functionalities and synchronization processes. - **Style** - Updated components to include `data-testId` attributes for improved testability. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
Jacques Ikot
|
d22b63277d
|
feat: starter building blocks for all users (#30909)
## Description **Goal** The starter building block on canvas experiment was a success, this PR removes the feature from behind a feature flag and makes it available to all users on the platform. Summary of changes - Remove feature flag condition in DropTarget component - Clean up unnecessary state used to find newUsers and firstTimeUsers - Remove redundant storage functions used for storing first time user and application id - Remove showStarterTemplatesInsteadofBlankCanvas prop in signUpHelper and signUpSuccess - #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #30903 #### 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 - [ ] 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 - **Refactor** - Simplified signup process by removing the option to choose starter templates or a blank canvas. - Streamlined onboarding component logic and storage management for a smoother user experience. - Optimized import organization and removed unused functions in the DropTargetComponent. - Enhanced test coverage for building blocks and starter templates in client-side templates. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> --------- Co-authored-by: Rahul Barwal <rahul.barwal@appsmith.com> |
||
|
Aishwarya-U-R
|
a6b8a3440e
|
test: Cypress | Text_With_Different_Size_spec.ts re-write + Flaky fixes (#30445)
## Description - This PR re-writes the entire Text_With_Different_Size_spec.ts spec to fix the master run flakyness and and improves the overall complexity of the test case format - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Onboarding/StartFromScratch_spec.ts (agHelper.VisitNAssert improved) - Master runs pass at [Run1](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith-ee/pull/3337#issuecomment-1899183181), [Run2](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith-ee/pull/3337#issuecomment-1899197871) - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/BugTests/AbortAction_Spec.ts (1st test - replace with TED url) - getConsolidatedDataApi() separated, created new agHelper.CypressReload() - Removed cy.log statements from few places - homePage.LogOutviaAPI() removed static wait - Replaced homePage.LogOutviaAPI(); with homePage.Signout(); in places where its flaky - Split /Onboarding/StartFromScratch_spec.ts to 3 specs to reduce flakyness - Split /ClientSide/PartialImportExport/PartialExport_Widgets_spec.ts with failing test to run the other tests in CI - /Templates/Fork_Template_To_App_spec.ts - Added dynamic check to fix CI flakiness - agHelper.AssertURL(), assertHelper.AssertDocumentReady() improved - jsEditor.NavigateToNewJSEditor() improved - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/ExplorerTests/JSEditorContextMenu_Spec.ts - jsEditor.ValidateDefaultJSObjProperties improved - cypress/e2e/Regression/ServerSide/OnLoadTests/OnLoadActions_Spec.ts - (3rd case - flaky fix) #### 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 changes were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Tests** - Enhanced test flexibility by dynamically constructing API URLs. - Improved test setup and flow in onboarding and regression suites. - Added new test spec files for dynamic height, onboarding, bug tests, login failure, and starting from scratch scenarios. - **Refactor** - Updated function calls and parameters across various test files for consistency and efficiency. - Removed redundant code and streamlined test actions. - **Chores** - Updated intercepted HTTP methods and added new utility functions to support test operations. - **Bug Fixes** - Fixed issues related to element visibility assertions in test scripts. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
Ashok Kumar M
|
c40b634185
|
fix: Fixing Anvil Section DnD Test cases. (#30995)
> Pull Request Template > > Use this template to quickly create a well written pull request. Delete all quotes before creating the pull request. > ## Description In this PR we are fixing the way events are dispatched and how position values are used to activate a section. This is still not set in stone as I need to write more utils based on alignment. but the current changes would be fail proof for the time being. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes # (issue number) > 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 <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Refactor** - Improved app navigation settings and layout validation. - Enhanced widget placement accuracy on the ANVIL canvas. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
Saroj
|
bd653d6b81
|
test: Fix flakiness in fork app test (#30994)
## Description - Fixing flakiness in ForkApplication_spec.ts -- Changed the sequence as the sequence is causing the issue -- Removed the addDsl() from before and added to the test it is necessary. #### Type of change - Cypress ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? - [x] Cypress > > <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Tests** - Updated regression test cases related to forking applications. - Modified paths to test spec files for improved organization. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
Hetu Nandu
|
1afe639911
|
chore: Show schema as a tab instead of the right pane (#30906)
## Description Moves the Schema in Query Pane from the right side to the tab on the bottom. This is done to eventually remove the right side pane for Side by Side layout #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #30873 #### Media https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/12022471/28c5086a-1967-4a72-8dc5-0717751198cf #### 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. - [ x ] Manual - [ x ] Jest - [ x ] Cypress <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Introduced a refresh button in the datasource structure container for easy refreshing. - Added a new state to handle scenarios with no columns to display, enhancing user feedback. - Implemented conditional rendering of components based on new props and states, improving UI responsiveness and interaction. - **Enhancements** - Updated placeholder texts and messages for a clearer user experience. - Improved the layout and styling of various components for better visual appeal and usability. - **Refactor** - Streamlined the rendering logic and state management in several components, leading to a cleaner codebase. - Removed unused imports and functions, optimizing component performance. - **Bug Fixes** - Fixed issues in test suites related to table schema handling and selection. - **UI Changes** - Adjusted styling properties for better alignment, display, and gap spacing in the datasource structure search container. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
albinAppsmith
|
6e44f96a77
|
fix: reverting back the context changes (#30899)
## Description Due to test failures, original context switching fix was reverted. This PR is to add it back. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/30651 #### 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 - **Refactor** - Enhanced test scripts for improved navigation and UI interaction. - Simplified rendering logic and removed unused elements in Editor's page and IDE components. - **New Features** - Introduced `PageElement` component for efficient page management. - Added custom hook `useGetPageFocusUrl` for dynamic URL generation. - **Tests** - Updated test scripts for consistent and readable navigation methods. - **Chores** - Minor adjustment in `ApiCommands.js` for reliable command execution. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
Ashok Kumar M
|
c37d0c283f
|
fix: Anvil Widgets not accessible when widget has no content. (#30780)
> Pull Request Template > > Use this template to quickly create a well written pull request. Delete all quotes before creating the pull request. > ## Description In this PR, we are fixing a few issues and also destructuring AnvilFlexComponent for edit and view. Issues Fixed - Widgets without any content like a text widget without text are not hoverable - Modal once opened does not close when other widgets on the canvas are selected via the enitty explorer. Anvil Flex Component was common component inspired from PositionedContainer of Fixed layout. It had all features of Edit and View together in one place. This mean viewer was unnecessarily interpreting more code. Now AnvilFlexComponent has been broken into AnvilFlexComponent and AnvilEditorFlexComponent. AnvilEditorFlexComponent is a wrapper around AnvilFlexComponent with abilities needed for Edit Mode. Another issue addressed in the PR is removal of DraggableComponennt, which was just making dragging possible and providing a few styles like fading the widget when it is being dragged. With this PR all the above mentioned functions will be taken care of by AnvilEditorFlexComponent. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #30734 > 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 <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Enhanced feature flag management with additional flags for better control over application features. - Introduced a new editor component for Anvil layout system, improving layout and behavior management in edit mode. - Added a custom hook for managing hover states on Anvil widgets, enhancing user interaction. - **Refactor** - Updated AnvilFlexComponent to use `forwardRef` for better ref management and optimized widget configuration and rendering logic. - Modified selector logic to simplify the retrieval of layout system type, enhancing code maintainability. - Adjusted test methodologies to improve reliability and accuracy. - **Bug Fixes** - Corrected assertions in Cypress end-to-end tests to accurately locate and interact with widgets in the Anvil canvas, ensuring test reliability. - **Chores** - Updated common locators and assertion methods in Cypress support files for consistency and clarity in test scripts. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
Aishwarya-U-R
|
4be051f143
|
test: Cypress | Flaky fixes (#30892)
## Description
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/BugTests/AbortAction_Spec.ts (ran
this multiple times & removed from flakylist)
- This PR fixes below flaky specs:
-- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Others/StatboxDsl_spec.js
(2nd test)
-- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Others/IconButton_2_spec.ts
(7th test)
#### 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**
- Updated Cypress regression tests to use `StatboxDsl_spec.js` instead
of `Fork_Template_spec.js`.
- Adjusted test case numbers and content for "tooltip" and "visible and
disabled toggle" tests.
- Removed and renumbered test case "4. Verify onClick".
- Added a new test case "7. Verify onClick" with updated logic for
testing onClick functionality.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
|
||
|
Aishwarya-U-R
|
85a447244a
|
test: Cypress | Flaky fix /Workspace/ShareAppTests_Spec.ts (#30875)
## Description - This PR fixes cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Workspace/ShareAppTests_Spec.ts (Airgap run flakyness) #### 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 - **Refactor** - Updated the file path for limited tests in the ClientSide workspace to enhance test organization. - Adjusted timing waits, reorganized test steps, and improved test flow and clarity. - Updated element interactions for better test performance. - Removed unnecessary comments and code for a cleaner test suite. - Replaced specific method calls for improved functionality. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
Trisha Anand
|
6a8039b313
|
Revert "fix: Navigating to page, navigate to last used segment instead of canvas" (#30891)
Reverts appsmithorg/appsmith#30652 |
||
|
albinAppsmith
|
b68f349eb6
|
fix: Navigating to page, navigate to last used segment instead of canvas (#30652)
## Description As of now, when user clicking on page, user gets navigated to UI first then will it will take to the recent tab. This PR will navigate directly to the recent segment. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/30651 #### 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) - 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 - [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 - [ ] 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 <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Enhanced IDE with additional parameter support in `useCurrentAppState`, `useSegmentNavigation`, and `useGetPageFocusUrl` functions for improved state management. - **Tests** - Improved Cypress E2E tests across various modules (Regression, ClientSide, Apps, Git, Sanity) with updated navigation and control flow using `PageLeftPane.switchSegment` for more precise page and segment selection during testing. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> --------- Co-authored-by: Hetu Nandu <hetu@appsmith.com> |
||
|
Saroj
|
686dfeeec0
|
test: Fixing flaky specs (#30818)
## Description - Fixed flakyness in ForkApplication_spec.ts - Removed FirstTimeUserOnboarding_spec.js as the the tests/scenarios covered are not relevant anymore due to new changes and the required changes has been covered in StartFromData_spec.ts and StartFromScratch_spec.ts already <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Tests** - Enhanced test automation by integrating `agHelper` and `assertHelper` functions, improving efficiency and reliability in test execution. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
Aishwarya-U-R
|
7824a702ca
|
test: Cypress | Skip bug test from MultiSelect5_spec.ts (#30871)
## Description - This PR does below: - Flaky fixes /ServerSide/GenerateCRUD/MongoURI_Spec.ts (no fix needed, multiple runs passing, removed from skipped list) - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Multiselect/MultiSelect5_spec.ts (skipped bug test & unskipping spec from CI runs) #### 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** - Updated the test specification for limited tests in the ServerSide GenerateCRUD section to improve coverage and reliability. - Switched test spec from `Fork_Template_spec.js` to `MongoURI_Spec.ts` and `MultiSelect5_spec.ts` in the ClientSide Widgets Multiselect section. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
Aishwarya-U-R
|
515e28a6f1
|
test: Cypress | Added Dynamic checks for Flaky fix + Cypress upgrade (#30840)
## Description - This PR does below: - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Templates/Fork_Template_To_App_spec.js (to .ts with flaky fix) - cypress/e2e/Sanity/Datasources/SMTPDatasource_spec.js (multiple runs, no fix was needed, removed from skipped list) - Cypress upgrade from 13.6.1 to 13.6.4 - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/EmbedSettings/EmbedSettings_spec.js (flaky fix) - cypress/e2e/Regression/ServerSide/QueryPane/S3_1_spec.js (6th test - flaky fix) - assertHelper.WaitForNetworkCall() - reduced wait timeout - deployHelper.DeployApp() added dynamic checks - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Git/GitSync/SwitchBranches_spec.js (removed redundant before hook to fix flakyness) - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Git/GitImport/GitImport_spec.js (removed redundant before hook to fix flakyness) #### 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 - **New Features** - Introduced functionality for forking a template to the current app and adding selected pages from a template. - **Bug Fixes** - Enhanced test stability by replacing sleep calls with dynamic wait conditions. - Improved test reliability and performance by adjusting waiting conditions for network calls and element assertions. - **Tests** - Updated the list of Cypress tests to include new scenarios and remove outdated ones. - Added new end-to-end tests for template forking and embed settings validation. - **Chores** - Optimized test support files and functions for better code maintenance and readability. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
Aman Agarwal
|
88e072763c
|
fix: schema plus button for a table is visible after template menu is opened (#30849) | ||
|
Aishwarya-U-R
|
67d20d9858
|
test: Cypress | Helpers improved + Flaky fixes (#30735)
## Description - This PR fixes the RenameApplication flakyness in CI with added dynamic check - Also replacing js cy.renameApp to TS helper - Flaky fixes - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Workspace/MemberRoles_Spec.ts (entire spec updates for EnableGAC, removed signout from 'it' blocks) - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Workspace/ShareAppTests_Spec.ts (7th flaky fixed) - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/SetProperty/WidgetPropertySetters2_spec.ts (5th test) - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Templates/Fork_Template_Existing_app_spec.js (2nd - added validation to match the test description, 1st & 3rd - removed static waits, Added multiple dynamic checks) - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/OtherUIFeatures/ApplicationURL_spec.js (3rd & 4th flaky tests) - homePage.AssertViewPageLoad() created - homePage.LaunchAppFromAppHover() improved - homePage.Signout() - added dynamic checks - Added more validation to homePage.Signup() method with Dynamic checks - homePage.LeaveWorkspace() removed redundant SelectWorkspace call - admingSettings.EnableGAC() - added dynamic checks - featureFlagIntercept - removed static sleep, reload check improved - agHelper.VisitNAssert() - removed static sleep - homePage.OpenMembersPageForWorkspace() - removed sleep, added dynamic checks #### 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 - **Refactor** - Enhanced Cypress test commands across multiple test suites for improved efficiency and readability. - Refactored conditional checks and method invocations for better test scenario handling. - **Tests** - Updated testing approaches for application deployment, workspace management, and error handling. - Introduced new assertions for UI visibility and functional behavior in automated tests. - **Chores** - Optimized GitHub Actions workflow by adjusting the matrix count for build processes. - Added new test specs for limited tests in the client-side regression suite. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
Preet Sidhu
|
d1bf668f7d
|
chore: remove auto focus for search bar in widget explorer (#30606)
## Description Issue: Clicking on MainCanvas moves focus to the search bar in widget explorer, rather than selecting MainCanvas. Fix: Remove autofocus for the said search bar #### 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 - [x] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [ ] 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 - [ ] 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** - Removed autofocus from the search input in the widget sidebar to improve user experience. - Adjusted focus management in the EntityExplorer class method for better user interaction. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
Ashok Kumar M
|
6765888eb0
|
chore: Anvil cypress tests (#30580)
> Pull Request Template > > Use this template to quickly create a well written pull request. Delete all quotes before creating the pull request. > ## Description In this pr we are writing tests to validate a few preliminary cases of the Anvil Editor. the purpose of the task is to be able to run anvil tests along side the present suite of test cases. Things to note for Anvil based test cases - ANVIL_EDITOR_TEST tag is used for Anvil based tests to make sure relevant feature flags are set(using featureFlagIntercept) before creating pages so that Anvil pages are created. - each test case in a Anvil spec file also use featureFlagIntercept to set the relevant flags since pages are reloded before running tests. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes # (issue number) > 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 <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Enhanced Anvil editor with the ability to test app navigation, drag and drop functionality, and suggested widgets feature. - Improved accessibility and interaction capabilities within the Anvil canvas. - **Tests** - Added comprehensive end-to-end tests for new Anvil editor features, including app navigation settings, widget drag and drop, and suggested widgets integration. - **Refactor** - Introduced new constants and locators for better test structure and readability. - **Style** - Updated components with new attributes for improved accessibility and testing. - **Chores** - Added new tags for organizing tests related to the Anvil editor. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
sneha122
|
b6cf348222
|
chore: fixed cypress sleep statement (#30743)
## Description This PR fixes cypress test statement of agHelper.Sleep() added in PR: https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/30720 #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes # (issue number) > 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 <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Tests** - Improved the reliability of the onboarding tests by replacing sleep timers with network status assertions. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> Co-authored-by: “sneha122” <“sneha@appsmith.com”> |
||
|
sneha122
|
4228173c98
|
fix: cypress test added for onboarding start with data (#30720)
## Description This PR adds cypress test for issue https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/30620 #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #30554 #### 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? > 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 - [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 - **Tests** - Added automated tests for the "Start with data" user flow in the onboarding process. - **New Features** - Enhanced the UI interaction in the Data Sources page by introducing an index-based element selection feature. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> Co-authored-by: “sneha122” <“sneha@appsmith.com”> |
||
|
Aman Agarwal
|
c9af064d4d
|
fix: Cypress | Workspace specs flaky fixes (#30722)
## Description - This PR fixes below flaky specs: - app/client/cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Workspace/CreateSameAppInDiffWorkspace_spec.js - app/client/cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Workspace/WorkspaceImportApplication_spec.js #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes # (issue number) > 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 <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Tests** - Enhanced test scenario for creating applications with the same name in different workspaces. - Improved reliability of workspace import application tests by ensuring all toasts disappear before proceeding. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
Aman Agarwal
|
cc620b3ab3
|
feat: removing delete multiple apps feature (#30661)
## Description Removing the bulk delete applications feature as it not generally used by many users and this was creating some UI conflicts rather than giving us some valuable output. Please follow this thread for more context : https://theappsmith.slack.com/archives/C02Q4B2AGM8/p1706249168968689 #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #30660 > 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 <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Refactor** - Streamlined the application deletion process to handle multiple deletions more efficiently. - **Bug Fixes** - Removed redundant code and unused features related to the multiple selection and deletion of applications. - **Chores** - Cleaned up various files by removing unused imports, constants, and state variables. - **Documentation** - Adjusted code comments and documentation to reflect removal of multiple application deletion features and related UI elements. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
balajisoundar
|
ede1e4dd06
|
fix: Select / Multi select widget should retain the selection when the options are server side filtered (#30490)
We are removing the validation check that checks whether the given default value is present in the source data. This validation check creates a dependency which leads to issue mentioned in the attached github issue. We are showing a helper message under the input with a message as follow: `Make sure the default value(s) are present in the source data to have it selected by default in the UI.` #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/29222 > 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? > 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 - [ ] 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 - [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 <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Enhanced user guidance with the addition of a helper text property in the MultiSelect widget. - Updated Select widget with a helper text property and extended dependencies for server-side filtering. - **Bug Fixes** - Resolved issue where MultiSelect widget selections were cleared during server-side filtering. - **Tests** - Added and modified test cases for MultiSelect and Select widgets to reflect new functionalities and ensure reliability. - **Style** - Improved tooltip display in TableWidgetV2 by increasing the max width and changing the position for better visibility and user experience. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
Ankit Srivastava
|
a45dcfa61f
|
feat: Homepage experience v2 changes (#29282)
> Pull Request Template > > Use this template to quickly create a well written pull request. Delete all quotes before creating the pull request. > ## Description > Add a TL;DR when description is extra long (helps content team) > > Please include a summary of the changes and which issue has been fixed. Please also include relevant motivation > and context. List any dependencies that are required for this change > > Links to Notion, Figma or any other documents that might be relevant to the PR > > #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes # (issue number) > 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 <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Added new workspace search functionality in the search bar. - Introduced a help button for user assistance. - Implemented new UI components for workspace selection and management. - Enhanced application card with edit permission checks. - Integrated workspace actions for creating and fetching workspaces directly from the UI. - **Improvements** - Improved workspace and application fetching logic. - Enhanced Global Search with updated import paths and logic. - Refined the layout and styling of the applications page and sub-header components. - Optimized workspace-related sagas and reducers for better performance and maintainability. - **Bug Fixes** - Fixed tooltip functionality in "Reconnect Datasources" within templates. - Corrected test logic for forking templates and applications. - Updated Cypress test commands for consistency and reliability. - Addressed issues with application URL test cases and workspace import logic. - **Documentation** - Updated messages and constants related to workspace and application UI elements for clearer user communication. - **Chores** - Cleaned up unused code and simplified selectors across various components and tests. - Refactored application and workspace selectors for improved code organization. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> --------- Co-authored-by: Dipyaman Biswas <dipyaman@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Abhijeet <abhi.nagarnaik@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Nidhi <nidhi@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Goutham Pratapa <goutham@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Ankita Kinger <ankita@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: albinAppsmith <87797149+albinAppsmith@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Shrikant Sharat Kandula <shrikant@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Nayan <nayan@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Rishabh Rathod <rishabh.rathod@appsmith.com> |
||
|
Rahul Barwal
|
e11c05495b
|
chore: Refactor SignUp method to simplify proficiency screen navigation (#30417)
## Description This pull request refactors the SignUp method to simplify the navigation process for the proficiency screen. The changes include removing unnecessary code and improving the flow of the method. Ï #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes # (issue number) > 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 <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Refactor** - Streamlined the signup process for enhanced user experience. - **Tests** - Updated automated tests to align with the new signup flow. - **Style** - Improved code readability and added explanatory comments in the test support files. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> --------- Co-authored-by: Aishwarya UR <aishwarya@appsmith.com> |
||
|
sharanya-appsmith
|
f6845d16f2
|
test: Cypress - removed skipped cases in MergeViaRemote_spec.ts (#30617)
## Description > Removed skipped cases in MergeViaRemote_spec.ts #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) #### 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** - Improved Git synchronization and conflict resolution test suite by removing, renaming, and reordering tests for clarity and efficiency. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |