deps/upgrade webauthn test support

[deen13]

Short Description

This pull request configures vitest and adds a simple test as suggested in my review of deps/upgrade_webauthn_2_0.

Proposed Changes

• Added a test task to package.json
• Included required vitest dependency
• Implemented a simple test for URL and base64 encoding
• Configure vitest to ignore python dependencies
• Configure import/resolver to resolve imports correctly
• Add job to circleci workflow

---

Pull Request Review Guidelines

[david-venhoff]

Thanks 🎉
I think it is a great step to enable js testing. It seems like this pr would close #2583, so it probably makes sense that @seluianova also takes a look at this.

When I tested this pr, I got an error that vitest exceeds the maximum number of file watchers on my system, because it seems to be watching every file in this repo (Including files of dependencies) for some reason. I managed to get rid of the error using this vitest.config.ts file:

import { defineConfig } from 'vitest/config';

export default defineConfig({
  test: {
    include: ['integreat_cms/static/src/js/__tests__/**'],
    watch: false,
  }
})

But I find it very weird that the watch: false option seems to be required to prevent this error, and that the glob is not enough to prevent it from watching every file.

Apart from that I think it makes sense to run npm test as part of our ./tools/test.sh, or is there a reason against that?

[deen13]

Just for the record: @david-venhoff and I successfully resolved the mentioned issue in commit 09be3e5.

[deen13]

Apart from that I think it makes sense to run npm test as part of our ./tools/test.sh, or is there a reason against that?

That's a good point @david-venhoff! I took a look at ./tools/test.sh and noticed that it has quite a few options that it passes on to pytest like the option to invoke a single test (./tools/test.sh tests/cms/my_test.py -k my_test_case). I would prefer to keep this file as is because it is tailored to pytest, and more importantly, I don't want to break anyone's workflow. Do you think it's worth adding another script that runs all python and ts tests but accepts no flags?

[deen13]

It seems like this pr would close #2583, so it probably makes sense that @seluianova also takes a look at this.

I believe the pull request only partially resolves the issue because it focuses solely on adding unit tests, whereas the mentioned issue pertains to UI tests. Nevertheless, I'm eager to contribute to UI testing if it's still necessary. Otherwise, feel free to disregard my comment.

[seluianova]

I believe the pull request only partially resolves the issue because it focuses solely on adding unit tests, whereas the mentioned issue pertains to UI tests

@david-venhoff right, in UI tests we wanted to add end-2-end kind of tests, that simulate user interaction. Like opening the browser, filling in fields, clicking on buttons, etc. At least that was my understanding of the task

[david-venhoff]

Ah okay 👍

I would prefer to keep this file as is because it is tailored to pytest, and more importantly, I don't want to break anyone's workflow. Do you think it's worth adding another script that runs all python and ts tests but accepts no flags?

Imo in an ideal world, we would have the parameters that can be passed to test.sh automatically work for both python and ts tests. But that seems complicated enough to be separated into its own pr, so I think what you propose is fine 👍