WIP - Add MU addon tests #8322
WIP - Add MU addon tests #8322
Conversation
ppcano
changed the title
ppcano
force-pushed
the
mu-addon-with-classic-dummy
branch
from
ea3f76d
to
02b7e99
Compare
|
I think the tests are failing because of 82bfaaa |
ppcano
force-pushed
the
mu-addon-with-classic-dummy
branch
from
02b7e99
to
83b983e
Compare
|
Looks good to me, would you mind rebasing (to kick off a new CI job) just to make sure things are still green? |
ppcano
force-pushed
the
mu-addon-with-classic-dummy
branch
from
83b983e
to
a45b02a
Compare
|
Rebased, CI job running |
ppcano
force-pushed
the
mu-addon-with-classic-dummy
branch
from
a45b02a
to
11fc124
Compare
ppcano
force-pushed
the
mu-addon-with-classic-dummy
branch
from
11fc124
to
16c4d3e
Compare
|
|
||
| // ember-addon | ||
| if (this.name === 'dummy') { | ||
| testSrcTree = 'src'; | ||
| destDir = `${this.project.name()}/src`; | ||
|
|
||
| // Classic Addon with MU dummy app `kitchen-sink-with-mu-dummy-app` will throw: `Dir not found: src` exception |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is there any better alternative than dirNotFound to avoid the error? Funnel.allowEmpty does not solve the issue.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I believe that allowEmpty fails to fix the issue here due to the same underlying issue that is described in broccolijs/broccoli-funnel#105.
I'd like to land broccolijs/broccoli-funnel#106 + release, then we can remove this work around.
What do you think?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@rwjblue Of course! I follow the issues and when they will be released, I will get rid of the dirNotFound hack.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I just released broccoli-funnel@2.0.2 with the fix...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@rwjblue Unfortunately broccoli-funnel@2.0.2 does not fix the issue.
The error is triggered by broccoli/lib/builder before the BroccoliFunnel.build is executed; the BroccoliFunnel.allowEmpty routine is never executed.
Any idea what may happen?
Stack trace:
- stack: BuilderError: Directory not found: src
at Builder.checkInputPathsExist (/Users/ppcano/dev/ember/ember-cli/node_modules/broccoli/lib/builder.js:261:15)
at new Builder (/Users/ppcano/dev/ember/ember-cli/node_modules/broccoli/lib/builder.js:65:10)
at Builder.setupBroccoliBuilder (/Users/ppcano/dev/ember/ember-cli/lib/models/builder.js:85:24)
at new Builder (/Users/ppcano/dev/ember/ember-cli/lib/models/builder.js:32:10)
at ServeTask.run (/Users/ppcano/dev/ember/ember-cli/lib/tasks/serve.js:45:55)
at Promise.resolve.then (/Users/ppcano/dev/ember/ember-cli/lib/models/command.js:243:46)
at tryCatcher (/Users/ppcano/dev/ember/ember-cli/node_modules/rsvp/dist/rsvp.js:323:19)
at invokeCallback (/Users/ppcano/dev/ember/ember-cli/node_modules/rsvp/dist/rsvp.js:495:31)
at /Users/ppcano/dev/ember/ember-cli/node_modules/rsvp/dist/rsvp.js:559:14
at flush (/Users/ppcano/dev/ember/ember-cli/node_modules/rsvp/dist/rsvp.js:2402:5)
|
Marking as WIP, it may be superceded by #8431 |
|
Closing in favor of #8431 |
Add tests to validate:
MU addon works with Classic dummy app
Classic addon works with MU dummy app
The implementation was almost completed, the PR only includes the tests.
In both cases, the MU env variable must be set to run the addon tests.
Discussed at #8158
EMBER_CLI_MODULE_UNIFICATIONEMBER_CLI_MODULE_UNIFICATIONEMBER_CLI_MODULE_UNIFICATIONNote
Atm, you cannot run two
dummyapps (MU/Classic) in the tests folder. But the new tests validate that the different combinations will work.If I need two dummy apps in my addon, I would create two
dummyfolders; for example:dummyandmu-dummyand rename the folders when they want to test different environments (this is not an optimal solution). I have open #8415 to explore a possible solution to this situation.