Refactor Jest CI scripts
What does this MR do and why?
Encapsulate CI Jest commands in a script
This script is intended to replace the eight jest:ci* scripts in
package.json. The eight variations arise from three booleans:
- Vue version (2 or 3),
- predictive/full test runs, and
- tests which do/don't need fixtures.
The motivation for creating this single script is to make it clearer how to run Jest specs under Vue 3.
Many people have tried and failed to replicate CI failurs locally by
running yarn jest:ci* scripts locally. The reason is that those
scripts have implicit dependencies that aren't satisfied (e.g., the
VUE_VERSION environment variable).
This new script helps by pointing users to resources to help them with Vue 3 testing, both after CI failures, and when attempting to run it locally.
Finally, this deletes the jest:ci* scripts, and updates references in
CI to call the new script directly.
It also removes a couple of other unused jest:ci* scripts.
References
Please include cross links to any resources that are relevant to this MR. This will give reviewers and future readers helpful context to give an efficient review of the changes introduced.
- n/a
MR acceptance checklist
Please evaluate this MR against the MR acceptance checklist. It helps you analyze changes to reduce risks in quality, performance, reliability, security, and maintainability.
Example jobs
| Vue 3 | Predictive | Fixtures | Job FIXME |
|---|---|---|---|
 |
|
|
passing, failing |
|
|
 |
passing, failing |
|
|
|
passing, failing |
|
|
|
passing, failing |
|
|
|
passing, failing |
|
|
|
passing, failing |
|
|
|
passing, failing |
|
|
|
failing (there isn't a passing example here because I forgot that this job isn't sharded, and so didn't create another pipeline for this case. |
How to set up and validate locally
- You can run the script locally with
scripts/frontend/jest_ci.js, to verify it logs the expected resources. - While it's possible to replicate CI runs locally, it's sufficiently fiddly that it's unlikely to truly verify how it will perform in CI. The best approach is to look at the example jobs above.
Merge request reports
Activity
assigned to @markrian
added pipelinetier-3 pipeline:run-e2e-omnibus-once labels
- A deleted user
added frontend label
Pipeline Changes
This merge request contains changes to the pipeline configuration for the GitLab project.
Please consider the effect of the changes in this merge request on the following:
- Effects on different pipeline types
- Effects on non-canonical projects:
gitlab-fosssecuritydev- personal forks
- Effects on pipeline performance
Please consider communicating these changes to the broader team following the communication guideline for pipeline changes
Reviewer roulette
Category Reviewer Maintainer frontend @eduardobonet(UTC+1, 1 hour ahead of author)
@deepika.guliani(UTC+5.5, 5.5 hours ahead of author)
maintenanceworkflow for tooling, Danger, and RuboCop @dbiryukov(UTC+1, 1 hour ahead of author)
@rymai(UTC+1, 1 hour ahead of author)
~"Pipeline configuration" Reviewer review is optional for ~"Pipeline configuration" @slashmanov(UTC+4, 4 hours ahead of author)
~"Tooling" Reviewer review is optional for ~"Tooling" @f_caplette(UTC-5, 5 hours behind author)
Please refer to documentation page for guidance on how you can benefit from the Reviewer Roulette, or use the GitLab Review Workload Dashboard to find other available reviewers.
If needed, you can retry the
danger-reviewjob that generated this comment.Generated by
Edited by Ghost User
Resolved by 🤖 GitLab Bot 🤖Proper labels assigned to this merge request. Please ignore me.
@markrian- please see the following guidance and update this merge request.1 Error Please add typebug typefeature, or typemaintenance label to this merge request. Edited by 🤖 GitLab Bot 🤖
E2E Test Result Summary
allure-report-publishergenerated test report!e2e-test-on-cng:
expand test summary
+------------------------------------------------------------------+ | suites summary | +-------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | | passed | failed | skipped | flaky | total | result | +-------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | Create | 140 | 0 | 19 | 1 | 159 | ✅ | | Verify | 49 | 0 | 16 | 0 | 65 | ✅ | | Package | 30 | 0 | 14 | 0 | 44 | ✅ | | Monitor | 8 | 0 | 12 | 0 | 20 | ✅ | | Ai-powered | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | ➖ | | Govern | 84 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 94 | ✅ | | Plan | 86 | 0 | 8 | 0 | 94 | ✅ | | Manage | 1 | 0 | 9 | 0 | 10 | ✅ | | Fulfillment | 2 | 0 | 7 | 0 | 9 | ✅ | | Data Stores | 33 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 43 | ✅ | | Secure | 2 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 7 | ✅ | | Analytics | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | ✅ | | Release | 5 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 6 | ✅ | | Configure | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 3 | ➖ | | Growth | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | ➖ | | ModelOps | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ➖ | +-------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | Total | 442 | 0 | 119 | 1 | 561 | ✅ | +-------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+e2e-test-on-gdk:
expand test summary
+------------------------------------------------------------------+ | suites summary | +-------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | | passed | failed | skipped | flaky | total | result | +-------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | Monitor | 8 | 0 | 12 | 0 | 20 | ✅ | | Package | 25 | 0 | 13 | 0 | 38 | ✅ | | Govern | 80 | 0 | 12 | 0 | 92 | ✅ | | Verify | 48 | 0 | 17 | 0 | 65 | ✅ | | Create | 135 | 0 | 20 | 0 | 155 | ✅ | | Data Stores | 33 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 43 | ✅ | | Plan | 82 | 0 | 8 | 0 | 90 | ✅ | | Fulfillment | 2 | 0 | 7 | 0 | 9 | ✅ | | Configure | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 3 | ➖ | | Release | 5 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 6 | ✅ | | Secure | 4 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 7 | ✅ | | Analytics | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | ✅ | | Manage | 1 | 0 | 9 | 0 | 10 | ✅ | | Ai-powered | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | ➖ | | Growth | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | ➖ | | ModelOps | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ➖ | +-------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | Total | 425 | 0 | 120 | 0 | 545 | ✅ | +-------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+Edited by Ghost Userrequested review from @leipert
mentioned in merge request !174724 (closed)
mentioned in merge request !174725 (closed)
changed milestone to %17.7
added Category:Design System devopsfoundations groupdesign system maintenancepipelines pipelinetier-1 sectioncore platform typemaintenance labels and removed pipelinetier-3 label
- Resolved by Kev Kloss
Thanks for the review, @leipert!
I've pushed some changes and responded.
Note that I still need to link to example jobs, which I'll take from this MR, and also !174724 (closed) and !174725 (closed). I'll do that tomorrow.
Feel free to wait until after I've done that before taking another look, or look now. Whichever you prefer
- Last reply by Lukas Eipert
requested review from @leipert
added pipeline:mr-approved label
added pipelinetier-3 label and removed pipelinetier-1 label
-
Before you set this MR to auto-merge
This merge request will progress on pipeline tiers until it reaches the last tier: pipelinetier-3. We will trigger a new pipeline for each transition to a higher tier.
Before you set this MR to auto-merge, please check the following:
- You are the last maintainer of this merge request
- The latest pipeline for this merge request is pipelinetier-3 (You can find which tier it is in the pipeline name)
- This pipeline is recent enough (created in the last 8 hours)
If all the criteria above apply, please set auto-merge for this merge request.
See pipeline tiers and merging a merge request for more details.
- Resolved by Kev Kloss
Opened #508139 (closed) for the follow ups.
- Last reply by Mark Florian
mentioned in issue #508139 (closed)
mentioned in issue #508762 (closed)
