Block Bindings: Add unit test coverage for sources #72799
Merged
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
ockham
added
[Type] Automated Testing
ockham
force-pushed
the
add/block-bindings-source-unit-test-coverage
branch
2 times, most recently
from
92a9bbb to
ccca546
Compare
|
Size Change: 0 B Total Size: 2.38 MB ℹ️ View Unchanged
|
|
Flaky tests detected in 1a0cca9. 🔍 Workflow run URL: https://github.com/WordPress/gutenberg/actions/runs/18945720443
|
ockham
force-pushed
the
add/block-bindings-source-unit-test-coverage
branch
from
9a73c72 to
202f424
Compare
|
The following accounts have interacted with this PR and/or linked issues. I will continue to update these lists as activity occurs. You can also manually ask me to refresh this list by adding the If you're merging code through a pull request on GitHub, copy and paste the following into the bottom of the merge commit message. To understand the WordPress project's expectations around crediting contributors, please review the Contributor Attribution page in the Core Handbook. |
gziolo
approved these changes
Nov 2, 2025
Member
gziolo
left a comment
gziolo
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is a very nice additiona that vastly improves testing code coverage for post meta source using unit tests.
Aside, I know these tests cover existing functionality so it's outside of scope in this PR. However, I must admit it's uncovers the underlaying problem of mixing the actual value with labels and keys inside content property. It's a bit confusing, but it might be too late to change how getValues work.
Contributor
Author
Yeah, I agree that that's not ideal. It might just make more sense to return |
ockham
added
the
Backport to WP 6.9 Beta/RC
github-actions
bot
removed
the
Backport to WP 6.9 Beta/RC
gutenbergplugin
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 3, 2025
…72799) Test coverage for the `core/post-meta` source is currently provided through e2e tests. This commit adds unit tests, providing more granular coverage, which in turn allows pinpointing issues more easily. Co-authored-by: ockham <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: gziolo <[email protected]>
github-actions
bot
added
the
Backported to WP Core
|
I just cherry-picked this PR to the wp/6.9 branch to get it included in the next release: 64c6b86 |
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.
What?
Add unit test coverage for block bindings sources.
Why?
See #72739 (comment):
How?
Note that there are some "natural" mappings, e.g.:
postIdin context (and editing a Movie CPT post maps to providing apostId).getValues.getFieldsList.or editthe value of a protected fieldshow_in_restset to falseshow oredit the value of a protected fieldTesting Instructions
To run the new unit tests locally:
To run the corresponding e2e tests locally:
Note that the e2e tests will most likely fail when run locally (even though the file is unchanged on this branch)! This is a known issue, although the reason is still unclear. It seems like the Post Meta source isn't always available during e2e tests. They do however pass in CI.
Follow-up
I think we should consider removing some of the e2e tests, specifically the ones that are basically just a thin wrapper around a check for the return value of a function such as
getValuesandgetFieldsList. When working on #72739, I found that they were obfuscating the underlying issue, rather than helping to pinpoint it.