Add projectConfig argument to shouldRunTestSuite hook #6350
Conversation
| listener(results), | ||
| ), | ||
| shouldRunTestSuite: async testPath => | ||
| shouldRunTestSuite: async (testPath, config) => |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Another option for this would be to change the signature to ({ testPath, config }) => {}, which might be better for future API changes, given that adding keys to that object would not be a breaking change.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Although this would mean an initial breaking change, which should probably only affect jest-watch-typeahead
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I hope people will understand it's still getting in shape ;)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We can call it out in the blog post as still somewhat experimental?
packages/jest-cli/src/run_jest.js
Outdated
| const shouldTestArray = await Promise.all( | ||
| data.tests.map(test => jestHooks.shouldRunTestSuite(test.path)), | ||
| data.tests.map(test => | ||
| jestHooks.shouldRunTestSuite(test.path, test.context.config), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How about passing a stripped information about test, e.g. ({path, duration, config})
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah that seems like the best idea
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Although duration is not always present, right?
packages/jest-cli/src/run_jest.js
Outdated
| const shouldTestArray = await Promise.all( | ||
| data.tests.map(test => jestHooks.shouldRunTestSuite(test.path)), | ||
| data.tests.map(test => | ||
| jestHooks.shouldRunTestSuite(test.path, test.context.config), |
types/JestHooks.js
Outdated
| shouldRunTestSuite: (testPath: string) => Promise<boolean>, | ||
| shouldRunTestSuite: ( | ||
| testPath: string, | ||
| config: ProjectConfig, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, from the discussion above I could see the type here being TestSuiteConfig which is some subset of Test
| jestHooks.shouldRunTestSuite({ | ||
| config: test.context.config, | ||
| duration: test.duration, | ||
| testPath: test.path, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
(testPath vs path) and (config vs projectConfig):
I like testPath and config better, but I'm fine with anything
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #6350 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 63.63% 63.63%
=======================================
Files 226 226
Lines 8648 8648
Branches 4 4
=======================================
Hits 5503 5503
Misses 3144 3144
Partials 1 1
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
|
Yes 🤦♂️ , I’ll add it when I wake up tomorrow morning, because I’m not in my computer right now |
|
Haha, timezones are weird. I'm on the bus on my way to work |
|
I'll let you send a new PR with the changelog entry pls! #movefast |
ghost
mentioned this pull request
|
This pull request has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs. |
7 participants
Summary
Currently, the
shouldRunTestSuitehook only takes thetestPath. I did that intentionally when designing plugins to keep the API surface as small as possible, but it seems that getting the ProjectConfig, along with thetestPathmight be useful.Another idea was to pass the whole
test: Testobject, which seems really nice but I'm worried that it will leak out a lot of implementation details, for examplecontext.moduleMapandcontext.hasteFS... The only other option inside test that would be interesting to get, isduration.This should allow us to do something like a
project selection plugin.