RI-8039 [E2E] 7.3 Settings -> Workbench Settings #5593
+184
−18
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,72 @@ | ||
| import { test, expect } from '../../../../fixtures/base'; | ||
|
|
||
| /** | ||
| * Workbench Settings tests (TEST_PLAN.md: 7.3 Workbench Settings) | ||
| * | ||
| * Verifies Workbench section controls are visible and that changing | ||
| * editor cleanup and pipeline commands settings persists after navigation. | ||
| * | ||
| * Note: "Configure command timeout" is N/A -- it's a per-database setting, not on the Settings page. | ||
| */ | ||
| test.describe('Workbench Settings', () => { | ||
| test.beforeEach(async ({ settingsPage }) => { | ||
| await settingsPage.goto(); | ||
| }); | ||
|
|
||
| test('should show editor cleanup switch', async ({ settingsPage }) => { | ||
| await settingsPage.expandWorkbench(); | ||
| await expect(settingsPage.editorCleanupSwitch).toBeVisible(); | ||
|
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. haven't tested it, but if it's easy, it makes sense to add a test that executes something in the workbench so we can validate the switch logic |
||
| }); | ||
|
|
||
| test('should show pipeline commands setting', async ({ settingsPage }) => { | ||
| await settingsPage.expandWorkbench(); | ||
| await expect(settingsPage.pipelineCommandsText).toBeVisible(); | ||
|
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. and for that one too (I imagine we can set it to 2, and validate just a single command is visible)
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. I don't think these should be tested here. The test must verify that you can change and save settings. How they affect the related feature, that should be tested as part of that feautre's tests |
||
| }); | ||
|
|
||
| test('should save editor cleanup when toggled', async ({ | ||
| settingsPage, | ||
| databasesPage, | ||
| }) => { | ||
| await settingsPage.expandWorkbench(); | ||
| await expect(settingsPage.editorCleanupSwitch).toBeVisible(); | ||
|
|
||
| const initialState = await settingsPage.isEditorCleanupEnabled(); | ||
| await settingsPage.toggleEditorCleanup(); | ||
| const toggledState = await settingsPage.isEditorCleanupEnabled(); | ||
| expect(toggledState).toBe(!initialState); | ||
|
|
||
| await databasesPage.goto(); | ||
| await settingsPage.goto(); | ||
| await settingsPage.expandWorkbench(); | ||
| const persistedState = await settingsPage.isEditorCleanupEnabled(); | ||
| expect(persistedState).toBe(toggledState); | ||
|
|
||
| await settingsPage.toggleEditorCleanup(); | ||
| const restoredState = await settingsPage.isEditorCleanupEnabled(); | ||
| expect(restoredState).toBe(initialState); | ||
| }); | ||
|
|
||
| test('should save pipeline commands when changed', async ({ | ||
| settingsPage, | ||
| databasesPage, | ||
| }) => { | ||
| await settingsPage.expandWorkbench(); | ||
| await expect(settingsPage.pipelineCommandsValue).toBeVisible(); | ||
|
|
||
| const initialValue = await settingsPage.getPipelineCommandsValue(); | ||
| await settingsPage.setPipelineCommandsAndApply(2); | ||
| await expect(settingsPage.pipelineCommandsValue).toHaveText('2'); | ||
|
|
||
| await databasesPage.goto(); | ||
| await settingsPage.goto(); | ||
| await settingsPage.expandWorkbench(); | ||
| const persistedValue = await settingsPage.getPipelineCommandsValue(); | ||
| expect(persistedValue.trim()).toBe('2'); | ||
|
|
||
| const restoreValue = initialValue.trim() ? parseInt(initialValue, 10) : 5; | ||
| await settingsPage.setPipelineCommandsAndApply(restoreValue); | ||
| await expect(settingsPage.pipelineCommandsValue).toHaveText( | ||
| String(restoreValue), | ||
| ); | ||
| }); | ||
| }); | ||
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back 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.
Non-scoped
apply-btnlocator matches multiple componentsLow Severity
The
pipelineApplyButtonlocator usespage.getByTestId('apply-btn'), which is a page-wide selector for a generic test ID shared by everyInlineItemEditorinstance in the app. The Advanced settings section also uses aSettingItem(which wrapsInlineItemEditorwith its ownapply-btn). If both sections are ever expanded and one enters edit mode unexpectedly, this locator could match the wrong button. A scoped locator — e.g., chaining off the pipeline container — would be more resilient.