-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 21
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
🥗🧹 Gizmo
: System Spec to Add and Remove Gizmo
#1588
Conversation
d344c03
to
c3c21dc
Compare
bin/setup
Outdated
if test -f ".env.development"; then | ||
echo "Found .env.development, leaving it in place!" | ||
else | ||
echo "Copying .env.development.example to .env.development" | ||
cp .env.development.example .env | ||
fi | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I have a feeling the .devcontainer/startup.bash
script may need to be updated with this new .env
changes?
Specifically, the block starting at line 92 may need to be adjusted.
This assumption may be wrong, but I wanted to bring it up sooner rather than later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Great catch!!!
It would be nice if the three places we use (bin/setup
, bin/setup-rails
, and .devcontainer/startup.bash
) all used the same shell script to create these default ffiles; perhaps bin/setup-env
? Are you available to do that refactor?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sure, I can do that.
One script to do a conditionally copy of both .env.example
and .env.development.example
?
And then in the .devcontainer/startup.bash
script, do the sed
stuff after running this script?
Mostly just probing to make sure I'm understanding what needs to be here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yep! I think the sed stuff should stay in the startup.bash
bcf4e3a
to
871265f
Compare
.env.example
Outdated
# SMTP_DOMAIN=localhost | ||
# SMTP_AUTHENTICATION=plain | ||
# SMTP_ADDRESS=localhost | ||
# SMTP_ENABLE_TLS=false |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Please break out system test step to it's own PR.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Done! Plz review!
a2272ee
to
df3ca07
Compare
- #1565 For whatever reason the automated check doesn't *FAIL* despite it failing when we manually execute it! Add Firefox to the RSpec tests Run in Headless mode on CI Don't send real emails in CI save screenshots yo Add the .env.development to the devcontaine Add Firefox to the RSpec tests Run in Headless mode on CI Don't send real emails in CI save screenshots yo
- #1565 OK this is also a bit much; but it does fix the bug. I'm going to try and tighten it up a bit
df3ca07
to
8706547
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
Gizmo
: System Spec to Add and Remove GizmoGizmo
: System Spec to Add and Remove Gizmo
Gizmo
's edit page does not actually remove theGizmo
from theSection
#1565Room
toSection
andFurniture
toGizmo
#1472For some reason the automated check doesn't FAIL despite it failing when we manually execute it!
The "cause" is that the gizmo form has two
_method
fields, one is the hidden_method
field that is automatically inserted byform_with
when themodel
ispersisted?
; the other is added by abutton
that sets the_method
to delete so that it can be removed.In the system spec; the driven
firefox
takes the_method
set by the clickedbutton
. In the user-land; it sends both methods; and Rails picks the first one.The "solution" will be to ditch the second
_method
(possibly even removing the ability to Remove a Gizmo from theupdate
form.)