test: verify the generated image links are working

[ST-DDT]

Fixes #3112

• Add tests to methods that produce links to ensure they still work #3112

This PR adds an integration test for the image module/all methods that return a url that actually points to something to ensure the url is working as expected.

The integration tests are run once a week or on demand.

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for fakerjs ready!

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	4f96e95
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/fakerjs/deploys/672f395ad5c12c00080f173d
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-3127.fakerjs.dev
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

---

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 99.96%. Comparing base (0d85075) to head (4f96e95).
Report is 1 commits behind head on next.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             next    #3127   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   99.96%   99.96%           
=======================================
  Files        2805     2805           
  Lines      217115   217115           
  Branches      976      979    +3     
=======================================
+ Hits       217044   217048    +4     
+ Misses         71       67    -4     

see 2 files with indirect coverage changes

[Shinigami92]

The current provided solution feels like mixin unit with integration tests. IMO we should split them from each other. That way, because we rely here also on external sources, we could execute this in a scheduled workflow e.g. every week or so, so we also reduce the "ddos" outgoing from this repo.

[ST-DDT]

Team Decision

• We will move these tests to integration-test/test/integration
• We will run the integration test once a week

[ST-DDT]

@xDivisionByZerox Like this or should I really use a separate folder structure?

[xDivisionByZerox]

@xDivisionByZerox Like this or should I really use a separate folder structure?

Thats how I do it in my projects, but I have my test files next to the actual implementation.

• directory
  • file.ts
  • file.spec.ts (unit tests)
  • file.(integration|int|it)[.-]spec.ts
  • file.(e2e|cy)[.-]spec.ts

The structure feels natural to me.

Since the tests are already in a separate directory, one might suggest splitting integration and unit tests into two directories as well:

• test
  • integration
  • file.(integration|int|it)?[.-]spec.ts
  • unit
  • file.spec.ts

On advantage would be that the test setup file might be more linear, since the file patter can be a diretory instead of a "crazy" pattern. Additionally, if integration tests do not have to follow the same structure like unit tests do, this might be a good approche as well.

[ST-DDT]

There are currently too many open PRs to move the unit tests to a subfolder.
So I will only move the integration tests to a subfolder.