From c73fafd8ec6b329e5ebae8a472b0d5db738d20fd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "github-actions[bot]" <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2023 00:23:26 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Update github-metrics.svg - [Skip GitHub Action] --- github-metrics.svg | 86 +++++++++++++++------------------------------- 1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 58 deletions(-) diff --git a/github-metrics.svg b/github-metrics.svg index 0eeafcd..6a038c3 100644 --- a/github-metrics.svg +++ b/github-metrics.svg @@ -1,8 +1,8 @@ - + - +
@@ -95,7 +95,7 @@ - 1089 Forkers + 1091 Forkers
@@ -321,25 +321,14 @@
- +
-
ishaqibrahimbot
- commented on - #19 Contract with matchers -
-
-
-
opened by mmadariaga in pactflow/pact-cypress-adapter
-
- Thanks for the quick reply @YOU54F! -Let me describe my use case: I'm working on a nextjs project for which we're using cypress to write all the component, integration, and e2e tests. As part of the project's scope, we are also required to set up contract tests via pact and pactflow to ensure no breaking changes are published by the provider (our backend). -Our solution architect suggested we use the cypress-pact plugin to reduce the maintenance burden since the idea was that generating contracts and using them would become a lot more seamless through the plugin. Recently while researching into this I found that the plugin was archived long ago and this adapter was published to work with cypress. -So I've configured the adapter in my project and have written a sample test using it that generates a pact file. My only issue now is that because of the lack of support of matchers, the broker checks the type and the value of a given property inside the response body instead of just making sure the property is of the right type. Only when I manually add - matchingRules - to the generated pact file does it work as I want. -So either you can give me some advice on what I should do for my use case, or we can somehow work on adding the matchers feature to the adapter. -Let me know if you need more context. +
noahdundas
+ forked + pactflow/example-provider + to + noahdundas/example-provider
@@ -348,23 +337,16 @@ Let me know if you need more context.
- +
-
YOU54F
- commented on - #19 Contract with matchers +
noahdundas
+ forked + pactflow/example-consumer + to + noahdundas/example-consumer
-
-
opened by mmadariaga in pactflow/pact-cypress-adapter
-
Something like that, I think my main concern would be allowing the user to use pact-js style matchers, rather than having to express json path notation. A pact-js user wouldn't look inside the pact file regularly, so their experience would be with the v2/v3 matchers interface. We should take should of serialising them correctly to the pact file. -We would need to consider the pact specification that gets written to the file, currently it assumes a v2 spec. if we cater for matching rules for both spec versions, then we want to ensure only one format is used, and the correct specification is also serialised. -There are typed schemas for each of the pact specs that may be useful for validation. -https://github.com/pactflow/pact-schemas -whats the use case where you need to use matchers with this adapter. Are you unable to use pact-js in your project? Our general advise if is you are not comparing these contracts against an openapi specification whereby the schema matching rules are applied by the tool (swagger-mock-validator), is to generate the contracts at the lowest layer (your api client) and reuse those pact contracts, as stubs for higher level tests (including those run with cypress). -We use that pattern within PactFlow between its UI/backend app.
-
@@ -374,14 +356,14 @@ We use that pattern within PactFlow between its UI/backend app.
-
YOU54F
+
mefellows
commented on - #43 add wait options + #19 Contract with matchers
-
opened by nielssc in pactflow/pact-cypress-adapter
-
Hey this looks good thanks, could you update the readme, and do you think its worth logging out a warning to the user if the alias is already already present?
+
opened by mmadariaga in pactflow/pact-cypress-adapter
+
No worries - thanks and good luck!
@@ -399,20 +381,8 @@ We use that pattern within PactFlow between its UI/backend app.
opened by mmadariaga in pactflow/pact-cypress-adapter
-
- Hey @YOU54F! I just started using the pact-cypress-adapter for a work project and realized the adapter doesn't currently support matchers. And then I found this PR. -It's quite important for my use case to make use of matchers - I want to use type-based matching and use stuff like - eachLike - for arrays and so on. -I'm open to collaborating with you on this PR. Here is my understanding of the approach you're suggesting: - -Use the matchers on the response body inside - cy.intercept - Use these to generate the pact file with the matchingRules -Reify the body for the network stubbing part of cypress - -Let me know if I've understood this correctly. If so, I'll start working on this via a fresh fork + PR. -
+
Thanks @mefellows, I'll start working on this feature over the weekend. +Regarding Yousaf's comments, I did previously read the article you've linked and understand the pitfalls of overloading the provider with extra and to-some-extent duplicate requests. We're going to restrict the number of pacts we generate in our tests and try to keep them as different as possible. Thanks for the heads up!
@@ -426,7 +396,7 @@ Let me know if I've understood this correctly. If so, I'll start working on this
mefellows
deleted branch - feat/consolidate-user-logins-by-email + fix/PACT-1472-remove-segmen in pactflow/docs.pactflow.io @@ -455,7 +425,7 @@ Let me know if I've understood this correctly. If so, I'll start working on this - + @@ -602,7 +572,7 @@ Let me know if I've understood this correctly. If so, I'll start working on this - + @@ -633,9 +603,9 @@ Let me know if I've understood this correctly. If so, I'll start working on this
Inspirers - ranked 25.7k out of 59.8m repositories + ranked 26k out of 64.2m repositories
-
Maintaining or created a repository which has been forked 429 times
+
Maintaining or created a repository which has been forked 430 times
@@ -704,7 +674,7 @@ Let me know if I've understood this correctly. If so, I'll start working on this
Maintainers - ranked 668k out of 59.8m repositories + ranked 668k out of 64.2m repositories
Maintaining a repository with 40 stars
@@ -713,7 +683,7 @@ Let me know if I've understood this correctly. If so, I'll start working on this
- Last updated 15 Nov 2023, 00:23:03 (timezone Europe/London) with lowlighter/metrics@3.34.0 + Last updated 16 Nov 2023, 00:23:20 (timezone Europe/London) with lowlighter/metrics@3.34.0