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

Harden integration testing #1822

Open
nateborr opened this issue Oct 25, 2024 · 2 comments
Open

Harden integration testing #1822

nateborr opened this issue Oct 25, 2024 · 2 comments

Comments

@nateborr
Copy link
Member

nateborr commented Oct 25, 2024

Investigate and choose an approach to harden Tock's browser-based integration testing, to minimize errors and toil due to library updates and changes in third-party platforms. If changes would be helpful, either implement them or open an issue to do that work as a follow-up.

Updating Puppeteer from version 19.11.1 to 23.6 for #1796 required some changes to keep the Jest/Puppeteer based integration tests running both in CircleCI and in a local Docker environment. These changes are working, but they've introduced some brittle elements:

  • CircleCI is configured to run the tests using a legacy headless mode for Chrome, which the Chrome docs suggest will be removed in the future.
  • In the Docker compose configuration used for local development, the "app" service was renamed to "application" to work around an issue in which Chrome's HTTP Strict Transport Security settings force requests to the app domain to use SSL. This is likely stable but it's an obscure naming dependency.

The relevant code changes were introduced in PR #1819. That PR's description includes additional technical context.

Some paths to consider:

  • Switching from Chrome to Firefox or another browser
  • Switching from Puppeteer to Playwright or another browser testing framework
  • Investigating whether we need to bring our CircleCI configuration up to date
  • Reducing differences between Tock's CI and local environments, potentially by moving away from CircleCI.
    • Moving from CircleCI will require compliance documentation changes.
    • It's possible to run a CircleCI job locally with its CLI tool, but currently that fails in our environment due to this issue when it attempts to launch multiple Docker containers in parallel.
@cantsin
Copy link
Member

cantsin commented Oct 25, 2024

Excellent write up, thank you! Another thing we can consider is moving away from CircleCI entirely. I don't like that we are seeing discrepancy between local and CI tests. But that will require some compliance document changes as well. For now, let's sit on this. Thanks again!

@nateborr
Copy link
Member Author

Thanks @cantsin , I've updated the issue description accordingly along with some context on our CircleCI setup.

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants