Tests: Add integration tests with core blocks schema validation #36351
Conversation
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
gziolo
added
[Package] Block library
|
Size Change: -35 B (0%) Total Size: 1.08 MB
ℹ️ View Unchanged
|
gziolo
force-pushed
the
update/core-block-schema-validation
branch
from
931072b to
609b1d7
Compare
gziolo
commented
Nov 9, 2021
| /** | ||
| * External dependencies | ||
| */ | ||
| import Ajv from 'ajv-draft-04'; |
Member
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I had to install ajv-draft-04 to make everything work with the defined schema:
http://json-schema.org/draft-04/schema#
Out of the box, Ajv supports JSON Schema (drafts 04, 06, 07, 2019-09 and 2020-12) and JSON Type Definition (RFC8927 (opens new window)).
However, in practice, only JSON Schema draft-06/07/2019-09/2020-12 standards work with the core ajv package. Is there any reason we picked draft-04?
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@gziolo This is all the context I have. We briefly talked about it in the initial review of the block.json introduction PR.
Member
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I guess it’s fine to leave it as is. Thank you for sharing the context 💯
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
SchemaStore has some best practices listed in their contributing docs that I was also basing my decisions off of. https://github.com/SchemaStore/schemastore/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#best-practices
This was referenced Nov 9, 2021
fabiankaegy
reviewed
Nov 9, 2021
Member
fabiankaegy
left a comment
fabiankaegy
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Outside of the outstanding comment regarding the Schema version I think this looks great and does what we need :)
mkaz
approved these changes
Nov 9, 2021
Member
mkaz
left a comment
mkaz
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is great! 🌟
Thanks for catching the blocks I missed, were they new? Good idea adding a test to make sure blocks have the file also. 👍
Validation script works well, I tested by making an invalid block.json file both by having improper JSON, and incorrect values that don't match the schema. The script picked up on all issues.
Great addition! 🚀
Member
Author
I know that some of them were new. |
8 tasks
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Description
Follow up for #35900.
Closes #36319.
Adds a missing
$schemafield to a few more blocks. I also wrote integration tests to enforce that every block hasblock.jsonwith the$schemafield and the metadata validates against the local schema.How has this been tested?
Types of changes
Automated tests added.
Checklist:
standards/wordpress-coding-standards/accessibility/ -->