Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

feat: Refine Node API & Improve test [WIP] #1395

Merged
merged 21 commits into from
Mar 4, 2019
Merged

feat: Refine Node API & Improve test [WIP] #1395

merged 21 commits into from
Mar 4, 2019

Conversation

ulivz
Copy link
Member

@ulivz ulivz commented Mar 3, 2019

Summary

  • Refined Node.js API
  • Repaired legacy test cases to let it pass CI
  • Provide official APIs under test utils to help users write test case for plugins. (See: example)
  • Fixed some bugs
    • Cannot debug yarn test since it's running as a child process.
    • Markdown slot doesn‘t work. (regression of c85f62d)

What kind of change does this PR introduce? (check at least one)

  • Bugfix
  • Feature
  • Code style update
  • Refactor
  • Docs
  • Build-related changes
  • Other, please describe:

If changing the UI of default theme, please provide the before/after screenshot:

Does this PR introduce a breaking change? (check one)

  • Yes
  • No

If yes, please describe the impact and migration path for existing applications:

The PR fulfills these requirements:

  • When resolving a specific issue, it's referenced in the PR's title (e.g. fix #xxx[,#xxx], where "xxx" is the issue number)

You have tested in the following browsers: (Providing a detailed version will be better.)

  • Chrome
  • Firefox
  • Safari
  • Edge
  • IE

If adding a new feature, the PR's description includes:

  • A convincing reason for adding this feature
  • Related documents have been updated
  • Related tests have been updated

To avoid wasting your time, it's best to open a feature request issue first and wait for approval before working on it.

Other information:

@ulivz ulivz requested a review from shigma March 3, 2019 19:47
@ulivz
Copy link
Member Author

ulivz commented Mar 3, 2019

@shigma Feel free to continue to improve tests into this branch, meanwhile, we need to do following things:

  1. Document the fresh Node.JS API.
  2. Add testing for rest official plugins.
  3. Document how to write testing for a plugin.

<div class="highlighted">&nbsp;</div>
<br>
</div>export default function () { // .. }
</div>
`;
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@shigma Note that this snap shouldn't be removed, I guess this case need to be updated.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Fixed at #1398

@ulivz ulivz added topic: config Relates to VuePress config semver: patch and removed semver: patch labels Mar 3, 2019
console.log(`running node with args: ${args.join(' ')}`)
await execa('node', args, {
await execa('jest', args, {
Copy link
Member Author

@ulivz ulivz Mar 4, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The jest runner is running under a child process, this change will cause the fail of debug since --inspect-brk is a node-level flag.

To make debug work, we need ensure that Parent and child process won't share the same inspecting port;

Copy link
Member Author

@ulivz ulivz Mar 4, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We can merge this feature request first, and I believe this is not the real reason why Windows can't run test. Looking forward to your PR later. 😉

@ulivz ulivz merged commit e5d8ed4 into master Mar 4, 2019
@ulivz ulivz deleted the improve-tests branch March 4, 2019 15:46
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
topic: config Relates to VuePress config
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants