Update Vitest to v1

[delucis]

Description

• Updates Starlight’s test dependencies to use the latest version of Vitest, updating from a pre-release to v1.

• A couple of test snapshots changed to a nicer string escaping algorithm — I inspected them visually and I don’t think anything important changed, mostly just stuff like:

  - "<el attr=\\"val\\">"
  + `<el attr="val">`

• Updated Vitest coverage thresholds config to match new format as changed in feat!(coverage): glob based coverage thresholds vitest-dev/vitest#4442

[changeset-bot]

⚠️ No Changeset found

Latest commit: f694b34

Merging this PR will not cause a version bump for any packages. If these changes should not result in a new version, you're good to go. If these changes should result in a version bump, you need to add a changeset.

This PR includes no changesets

When changesets are added to this PR, you'll see the packages that this PR includes changesets for and the associated semver types

Click here to learn what changesets are, and how to add one.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add a changeset to this PR

[vercel]

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name	Status	Preview	Updated (UTC)
starlight	✅ Ready (Inspect)	Visit Preview	Jan 30, 2024 2:58pm

1 Ignored Deployment

Name	Status	Preview	Updated (UTC)
starlight-i18n	⬜️ Ignored (Inspect)		Jan 30, 2024 2:58pm

[astrobot-houston]

size-limit report 📦

Path	Size
/index.html	5.22 KB (0%)
/_astro/*.js	21.54 KB (0%)
/_astro/*.css	13.14 KB (0%)

[HiDeoo]

I also updated Vitest in various packages just to get nicer snippets and they are definitely better imo so 👍 on my end.

Locally (and CI too actually), I get a few [ERROR] [vite] WebSocket server error: Port is already in use errors but I don't think they're relevant to us.

[delucis]

Locally (and CI too actually), I get a few [ERROR] [vite] WebSocket server error: Port is already in use errors but I don't think they're relevant to us.

Yes, I noticed these too. I think it’s something to do with things happening in parallel? @hippotastic reported the same errors in the parallel builds of the example projects and added a --workspace-concurrency 1 option to that package script as part of #1395. I can try that for the tests too, to see if it helps.

[HiDeoo]

Yes, I noticed these too. I think it’s something to do with things happening in parallel? @hippotastic reported the same errors in the parallel builds of the example projects and added a --workspace-concurrency 1 option to that package script as part of #1395. I can try that for the tests too, to see if it helps.

Interesting, to add more details, I got them when running only the starlight package tests from its directory so not sure this would help (as I think it's a pnpm workspace flag).

[delucis]

Ah, good point — I think I saw that too. We do have multiple Vitest workspaces — perhaps would need those to be run sequentially.

[HiDeoo]

I wonder if it could be vitejs/vite#14328 and we should just ignore in this specific context of testing (the last comment provide a Vitest workaround but a bit annoying imo).

[delucis]

I wonder if it could be vitejs/vite#14328 and we should just ignore in this specific context of testing (the last comment provide a Vitest workaround but a bit annoying imo).

Nice find! Yeah, I think adding special handling just to hide a warning is not really essential. Eventually they’ll probably fix it and in the mean time we can just not worry about those logs.

[HiDeoo]

I wonder if it could be vitejs/vite#14328 and we should just ignore in this specific context of testing (the last comment provide a Vitest workaround but a bit annoying imo).

Nice find! Yeah, I think adding special handling just to hide a warning is not really essential. Eventually they’ll probably fix it and in the mean time we can just not worry about those logs.

I agree, and it looks like Vitest is supposed to have this workaround but it's not working for some reasons.

[delucis]

I agree, and it looks like Vitest is supposed to have this workaround but it's not working for some reasons.

Oh yeah… Well, overriding a global like that is always a bit flaky if some other code somewhere also does something to it, so I guess not totally shocking it’s not working. Still, think I’m happy to merge this for now.