Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Make flow execution output work with JUNIT output format #1721

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

NyCodeGHG
Copy link
Contributor

Proposed Changes

This PR allows the flow execution output to work while choosing the JUnit output format.
It also adds a new flag --hide-execution, which allows hiding of the execution output.

Testing

Ran the android advanced example flow, as well as an internal test suite, using with and without the --output=junit flag.

@axelniklasson
Copy link
Collaborator

@NyCodeGHG could you share some more examples on what this change does? Some console output with and without the --hide-execution would be appreciated, thanks!

@axelniklasson axelniklasson self-requested a review May 28, 2024 13:34
@axelniklasson axelniklasson self-assigned this May 28, 2024
@NyCodeGHG
Copy link
Contributor Author

@axelniklasson sure!
Previously maestro didn't show the output of a flow when running a single flow using the junit output format, with this change this does work.
I added --hide-execution as a feature to get a similar experience to the previous behaviour.

maestro-pr-1721-recording-ffmpeged.webm

@axelniklasson
Copy link
Collaborator

@axelniklasson sure! Previously maestro didn't show the output of a flow when running a single flow using the junit output format, with this change this does work. I added --hide-execution as a feature to get a similar experience to the previous behaviour.

maestro-pr-1721-recording-ffmpeged.webm

@NyCodeGHG Nice, this explains the changes very well - thanks! Before we do an in-depth review of this PR, let's invert the behavior of the flag making this an opt-in change instead of an opt-out to keep the current behavior. We can call the flag --show-execution-output and when set enables the output and it defaults to false.

@axelniklasson axelniklasson requested review from lucaswiechmann and removed request for axelniklasson June 5, 2024 12:24
@axelniklasson
Copy link
Collaborator

@lucaswiechmann will help get this merged as I'll be OOO starting next week. Please let him know when you've updated the PR @NyCodeGHG!

@NyCodeGHG
Copy link
Contributor Author

@axelniklasson / @lucaswiechmann
are you sure changing this behaviour is a good idea?
with this pr it's still different as it would show nothing at all, instead of the output that a flow is running.
So the default user experience would be worse

@lucaswiechmann
Copy link

@axelniklasson / @lucaswiechmann are you sure changing this behaviour is a good idea? with this pr it's still different as it would show nothing at all, instead of the output that a flow is running. So the default user experience would be worse

Hey @NyCodeGHG

let's keep the current output/behavior that we have today
image

And then add two flags:

  • one to show extended output like this
image
  • Another (we could keep the hide-execution) to not show any output at all

@NyCodeGHG
Copy link
Contributor Author

@lucaswiechmann
I like your suggestion, but I'm not sure if thats easily possible, as the current behaviour/output is an entirely different codepath.

@chrisaydat

This comment was marked as off-topic.

@bartekpacia

This comment was marked as off-topic.

@NyCodeGHG

This comment was marked as off-topic.

@NyCodeGHG NyCodeGHG closed this Aug 16, 2024
@bartekpacia

This comment was marked as off-topic.

@bartekpacia bartekpacia reopened this Aug 16, 2024
@chrisaydat

This comment was marked as off-topic.

@bartekpacia

This comment was marked as off-topic.

@bartekpacia
Copy link
Contributor

Review note:

@bartekpacia
Copy link
Contributor

My reasoning: specifying --format (whether JUnit or HTML) should have no impact on Maestro CLI output. It's an unrelated option.

Therefore, I don't think the --hide-execution is needed.

@bartekpacia
Copy link
Contributor

Ahh, there's a big merge conflict in TestCommand, because of #1732

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants