Merged
Conversation
github-actions
bot
added
the
group/frontend
Contributor
WalkthroughUpdates frontend configuration and tooling: modifies 🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 2 | ❌ 1❌ Failed checks (1 warning)
✅ Passed checks (2 passed)
✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings. Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
frontend/app/tests/e2e/docs-regression-check/guides/resource_manager_guide.spec.ts (1)
122-122: Track the TODO as an explicit follow-up task.The pending allocation case is noted, but it would be safer to link it to a concrete tracked test task so it doesn’t get lost during future refactors.
If you want, I can draft a follow-up issue template/checklist for implementing the
#5888allocation coverage.🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed. In `@frontend/app/tests/e2e/docs-regression-check/guides/resource_manager_guide.spec.ts` at line 122, Replace the inline TODO comment about "Allocating an IP prefix to a relationship of a node - Need `#5888`" with an explicit tracked follow-up reference: create or confirm the tracking task (issue `#5888`) in the project tracker, then update the test file (resource_manager_guide.spec.ts) to reference that issue ID, include a short owner/assignee and expected milestone or ETA in the comment (e.g., "TODO: see issue `#5888` — owner: `@team-member`, target: Q2"), and optionally add a link to the issue so future refactors can find and complete the pending allocation test.
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.
Nitpick comments:
In
`@frontend/app/tests/e2e/docs-regression-check/guides/resource_manager_guide.spec.ts`:
- Line 122: Replace the inline TODO comment about "Allocating an IP prefix to a
relationship of a node - Need `#5888`" with an explicit tracked follow-up
reference: create or confirm the tracking task (issue `#5888`) in the project
tracker, then update the test file (resource_manager_guide.spec.ts) to reference
that issue ID, include a short owner/assignee and expected milestone or ETA in
the comment (e.g., "TODO: see issue `#5888` — owner: `@team-member`, target: Q2"),
and optionally add a link to the issue so future refactors can find and complete
the pending allocation test.
ℹ️ Review info
Configuration used: Organization UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
frontend/app/package-lock.jsonis excluded by!**/package-lock.json
📒 Files selected for processing (5)
frontend/app/biome.jsoncfrontend/app/package.jsonfrontend/app/tests/e2e/docs-regression-check/guides/resource_manager_guide.spec.tsfrontend/app/tests/e2e/objects/profiles/profiles.spec.tsfrontend/app/tests/e2e/tasks/tasks-view.spec.ts
bilalabbad
force-pushed
the
bab-update-frontend-dependencies
branch
from
8c0bec6 to
37ab287
Compare
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Nitpick comments (5)
frontend/app/tests/e2e/objects/profiles/profiles.spec.ts (4)
49-51: Minor: Redundant locator re-query.The
profileLinklocator is created on line 49 but then a new identical query is made on line 51. Consider reusing the locator variable.Suggested fix
const profileLink = page.getByRole("link", { name: "profile test tag" }); await expect(profileLink).toBeVisible({ timeout: 30_000 }); - await page.getByRole("link", { name: "profile test tag" }).click(); + await profileLink.click();🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed. In `@frontend/app/tests/e2e/objects/profiles/profiles.spec.ts` around lines 49 - 51, The test redundantly re-queries the same link locator; reuse the existing profileLink locator instead of calling page.getByRole(...) again. Replace the second call so the click uses the profileLink variable (created as const profileLink = page.getByRole("link", { name: "profile test tag" })) and keep the visibility assertion and click on that same locator to avoid duplicate queries.
76-78: Minor: Redundant locator re-query.Same pattern as above -
profileOptionis created but then re-queried on line 78.Suggested fix
const profileOption = page.getByRole("option", { name: "profile test tag" }); await expect(profileOption).toBeVisible({ timeout: 30_000 }); - await page.getByRole("option", { name: "profile test tag" }).click(); + await profileOption.click();🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed. In `@frontend/app/tests/e2e/objects/profiles/profiles.spec.ts` around lines 76 - 78, The test creates a locator named profileOption but then re-queries the same locator for the click; update the code to reuse the existing locator (profileOption) for the click to avoid the redundant page.getByRole call—i.e., replace the second page.getByRole("option", { name: "profile test tag" }).click() with profileOption.click() so the locator is defined once and reused.
63-64: Missingawaitonexpectassertion.The
expect(page.url()).toContain(...)call is missingawait. While synchronousexpectworks here becausepage.url()is synchronous, for consistency with other Playwright assertions and to avoid confusion, consider using the async pattern.Suggested fix
- expect(page.url()).toContain("/objects/CoreProfile"); + await expect(page).toHaveURL(/\/objects\/CoreProfile/);🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed. In `@frontend/app/tests/e2e/objects/profiles/profiles.spec.ts` around lines 63 - 64, The assertion using page.url() in the test (expect(page.url()).toContain("/objects/CoreProfile")) is missing an await; update the test in profiles.spec.ts to use the async Playwright assertion pattern—either await the expect call or replace it with await expect(page).toHaveURL(expect.stringContaining("/objects/CoreProfile"))—so the assertion is awaited consistently with other Playwright assertions.
119-119: Missingawaitonexpectassertion.Same issue as line 63 - missing
awaiton URL assertion.Suggested fix
- expect(page.url()).toContain("/objects/ProfileBuiltinTag/"); + await expect(page).toHaveURL(/\/objects\/ProfileBuiltinTag\//);🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed. In `@frontend/app/tests/e2e/objects/profiles/profiles.spec.ts` at line 119, The assertion is calling expect(page.url()).toContain(...) without awaiting the URL; update the assertion to await the URL promise by changing expect(page.url()).toContain("/objects/ProfileBuiltinTag/") to expect(await page.url()).toContain("/objects/ProfileBuiltinTag/") (referencing expect and page.url()) so the test waits for the resolved URL before asserting.frontend/app/tests/e2e/docs-regression-check/guides/resource_manager_guide.spec.ts (1)
122-122: TODO tracking: Incomplete IP Prefix Pool allocation test.The TODO comment references issue
#5888for allocating an IP prefix to a relationship of a node. Ensure this is tracked and the test is completed when the feature is available.Would you like me to verify if issue
#5888is still open and track this TODO?#!/bin/bash # Check the status of issue `#5888` gh issue view 5888 --repo opsmill/infrahub --json state,title,url 2>/dev/null || echo "Issue not found or access denied"🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed. In `@frontend/app/tests/e2e/docs-regression-check/guides/resource_manager_guide.spec.ts` at line 122, Replace the vague TODO comment about IP prefix allocation with a tracked TODO that includes the issue number (`#5888`) and a clear action (e.g., "skip until feature `#5888` implemented"), so future runs know why the test is skipped; update the comment in resource_manager_guide.spec.ts (the existing TODO line "Allocating an IP prefix to a relationship of a node - Need `#5888`") to explicitly mark the test as skipped/blocked and append a short gh CLI snippet (commented) to check issue state (gh issue view 5888...) for maintainers to verify when to re-enable the test.
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.
Inline comments:
In `@frontend/app/tests/e2e/tasks/tasks-view.spec.ts`:
- Around line 5-6: Replace the broken split call to test.describe and .fixme
with the idiomatic single chained call test.describe.fixme(...) so the
declaration uses Playwright's documented property chain; update the test suite
declaration that currently separates test.describe and .fixme into one line
using test.describe.fixme with the existing description string and callback to
restore conventional syntax.
---
Nitpick comments:
In
`@frontend/app/tests/e2e/docs-regression-check/guides/resource_manager_guide.spec.ts`:
- Line 122: Replace the vague TODO comment about IP prefix allocation with a
tracked TODO that includes the issue number (`#5888`) and a clear action (e.g.,
"skip until feature `#5888` implemented"), so future runs know why the test is
skipped; update the comment in resource_manager_guide.spec.ts (the existing TODO
line "Allocating an IP prefix to a relationship of a node - Need `#5888`") to
explicitly mark the test as skipped/blocked and append a short gh CLI snippet
(commented) to check issue state (gh issue view 5888...) for maintainers to
verify when to re-enable the test.
In `@frontend/app/tests/e2e/objects/profiles/profiles.spec.ts`:
- Around line 49-51: The test redundantly re-queries the same link locator;
reuse the existing profileLink locator instead of calling page.getByRole(...)
again. Replace the second call so the click uses the profileLink variable
(created as const profileLink = page.getByRole("link", { name: "profile test
tag" })) and keep the visibility assertion and click on that same locator to
avoid duplicate queries.
- Around line 76-78: The test creates a locator named profileOption but then
re-queries the same locator for the click; update the code to reuse the existing
locator (profileOption) for the click to avoid the redundant page.getByRole
call—i.e., replace the second page.getByRole("option", { name: "profile test
tag" }).click() with profileOption.click() so the locator is defined once and
reused.
- Around line 63-64: The assertion using page.url() in the test
(expect(page.url()).toContain("/objects/CoreProfile")) is missing an await;
update the test in profiles.spec.ts to use the async Playwright assertion
pattern—either await the expect call or replace it with await
expect(page).toHaveURL(expect.stringContaining("/objects/CoreProfile"))—so the
assertion is awaited consistently with other Playwright assertions.
- Line 119: The assertion is calling expect(page.url()).toContain(...) without
awaiting the URL; update the assertion to await the URL promise by changing
expect(page.url()).toContain("/objects/ProfileBuiltinTag/") to expect(await
page.url()).toContain("/objects/ProfileBuiltinTag/") (referencing expect and
page.url()) so the test waits for the resolved URL before asserting.
ℹ️ Review info
Configuration used: Organization UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
frontend/app/package-lock.jsonis excluded by!**/package-lock.json
📒 Files selected for processing (6)
frontend/app/.betterer.resultsfrontend/app/biome.jsoncfrontend/app/package.jsonfrontend/app/tests/e2e/docs-regression-check/guides/resource_manager_guide.spec.tsfrontend/app/tests/e2e/objects/profiles/profiles.spec.tsfrontend/app/tests/e2e/tasks/tasks-view.spec.ts
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)
- frontend/app/package.json
- frontend/app/.betterer.results
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary by CodeRabbit
Chores
Tests