Skip to content
This repository was archived by the owner on Jul 19, 2025. It is now read-only.

Conversation

@dmtrKovalenko
Copy link
Contributor

Try to collect coverage from cypress tests

@vercel
Copy link

vercel bot commented Feb 13, 2020

This pull request is being automatically deployed with ZEIT Now (learn more).
To see the status of your deployment, click below or on the icon next to each commit.

🔍 Inspect: https://zeit.co/mui-org/material-ui-pickers/ioiguhnr1
✅ Preview: https://material-ui-pickers-git-feature-cypress-coverage.mui-org.now.sh

@cypress
Copy link

cypress bot commented Feb 13, 2020



Test summary

53 4 1 0


Run details

Project material-ui-pickers
Status Failed
Commit 52809e3
Started Feb 13, 2020 8:04 PM
Ended Feb 13, 2020 8:05 PM
Duration 01:04 💡
OS Linux Debian - 9.8
Browser Electron 61

View run in Cypress Dashboard ➡️


Failures

App.spec.ts Failed
1 App navigation > Getting Started > Opens Installation page
DatePicker.spec.ts Failed
1 DatePicker > Mobile DatePicker > Should open date picker on 01-01-2018
KeyboardNavigation.spec.ts Failed
1 Keyboard navigation > DatePicker > Modal calendar allows to change date with keyboard
VisualRegression.spec.ts Failed
1 Visual Regression > Landing > Displays Landing page

This comment has been generated by cypress-bot as a result of this project's GitHub integration settings. You can manage this integration in this project's settings in the Cypress Dashboard

@oliviertassinari
Copy link
Member

@dmtrKovalenko What's the objective of this pull request? What's the status of it?

@dmtrKovalenko
Copy link
Contributor Author

Can be closed, anyway will be supressed by other PR

@oliviertassinari
Copy link
Member

oliviertassinari commented Jun 22, 2020

@dmtrKovalenko It seems that the objective is to get test coverage reporting. If it's the case, we can defer the resolution of the problem to mui/material-ui#19706, where it's already set up in the main repository. Is that correct?

@dmtrKovalenko
Copy link
Contributor Author

dmtrKovalenko commented Jun 22, 2020

No, I intend to keep cypress tests so it needs to be done anyway.

It will be much easier after migrating all tests to components

@dmtrKovalenko dmtrKovalenko deleted the feature/cypress-coverage branch June 22, 2020 09:31
@oliviertassinari
Copy link
Member

oliviertassinari commented Jun 22, 2020

@dmtrKovalenko Would you mind expanding? From #1730 (comment), I thought that the policy was to replace cypress with testing-library, and introduce it back or an alternative tool like playwright as we hit a roadblock (depending on the pain points and what can best solve it). In such a roadmap, coverage with cypress has little value.

@dmtrKovalenko
Copy link
Contributor Author

Haha, I had absolutely different view

@oliviertassinari
Copy link
Member

@dmtrKovalenko What do you think about it?

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants