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

test: user journey tests for Go based snyk code test #5172

Open
wants to merge 6 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

j-luong
Copy link
Contributor

@j-luong j-luong commented Apr 17, 2024

Risk assessment

Low - Changes to test files, no functional changes

Pull Request Submission

Please check the boxes once done.

The pull request must:

  • Reviewer Documentation
    • follow CONTRIBUTING rules
    • be accompanied by a detailed description of the changes
    • contain a risk assessment of the change (Low | Medium | High) with regards to breaking existing functionality. A change e.g. of an underlying language plugin can completely break the functionality for that language, but appearing as only a version change in the dependencies.
    • highlight breaking API if applicable
    • contain a link to the automatic tests that cover the updated functionality.
    • contain testing instructions in case that the reviewer wants to manual verify as well, to add to the manual testing done by the author.
    • link to the link to the PR for the User-facing documentation
  • User facing Documentation
    • update any relevant documentation in gitbook by submitting a gitbook PR, and including the PR link here
    • ensure that the message of the final single commit is descriptive and prefixed with either feat: or fix: , others might be used in rare occasions as well, if there is no need to document the changes in the release notes. The changes or fixes should be described in detail in the commit message for the changelog & release notes.
  • Testing
    • Changes, removals and additions to functionality must be covered by acceptance / integration tests or smoke tests - either already existing ones, or new ones, created by the author of the PR.

Pull Request Review

All pull requests must undergo a thorough review process before being merged.
The review process of the code PR should include code review, testing, and any necessary feedback or revisions.
Pull request reviews of functionality developed in other teams only review the given documentation and test reports.

Manual testing will not be performed by the reviewing team, and is the responsibility of the author of the PR.

For Node projects: It’s important to make sure changes in package.json are also affecting package-lock.json correctly.

If a dependency is not necessary, don’t add it.

When adding a new package as a dependency, make sure that the change is absolutely necessary. We would like to refrain from adding new dependencies when possible.
Documentation PRs in gitbook are reviewed by Snyk's content team. They will also advise on the best phrasing and structuring if needed.

Pull Request Approval

Once a pull request has been reviewed and all necessary revisions have been made, it is approved for merging into
the main codebase. The merging of the code PR is performed by the code owners, the merging of the documentation PR
by our content writers.

What does this PR do?

This PR changes the structure of the snyk code tests intest/jest/acceptance/snyk-code/snyk-code.spec.ts. It:

  • adds tests to cover the incoming Go based snyk code test functionality
  • follows the CLI automated testing strategy by splitting integration and user journey tests

Where should the reviewer start?

Reviewing the changes to the test file

How should this be manually tested?

  • make clean build
  • TEST_SNYK_COMMAND=./binary-releases/<snyk-binary> npx jest ././test/jest/acceptance/snyk-code/snyk-code.spec.ts

Any background context you want to provide?

What are the relevant tickets?

Screenshots

Additional questions

Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Apr 17, 2024

Warnings
⚠️

Since the CLI is unifying on a standard and improved tooling, we're starting to migrate old-style imports and exports to ES6 ones.
A file you've modified is using either module.exports or require(). If you can, please update them to ES6 import syntax and export syntax.
Files found:

  • test/jest/acceptance/snyk-code/snyk-code.spec.ts

Generated by 🚫 dangerJS against b579944

@j-luong j-luong force-pushed the chore/CLI-225_validateNativeSnykCode branch 7 times, most recently from c053d34 to 6534150 Compare April 17, 2024 15:54
@j-luong j-luong marked this pull request as ready for review April 17, 2024 15:59
@j-luong j-luong requested a review from a team as a code owner April 17, 2024 15:59
const EXIT_CODE_SUCCESS = 0;
const EXIT_CODE_ACTION_NEEDED = 1;
const EXIT_CODE_FAIL_WITH_ERROR = 2;
const EXIT_CODE_NO_SUPPORTED_FILES = 3;

describe('code', () => {
describe('snyk code test', () => {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

suggestion: move beforeall/after hooks into dedicated describe blocks for user journey tests

expect(code).toBe(EXIT_CODE_ACTION_NEEDED);

const jsonOutput = JSON.parse(stdout);
expect(jsonOutput).toMatchSchema(SARIF_SCHEMA);
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

praise: Very happy to see us validating against the schema rather than the contents 💜

// INTERNAL_SNYK_CODE_IGNORES_ENABLED: 'true',
// },
// }
];
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

issue: We are missing mocked responses for the new analysis endpoints.

@thisislawatts thisislawatts force-pushed the chore/CLI-225_validateNativeSnykCode branch from 6534150 to a0ffe17 Compare May 2, 2024 08:31
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
2 participants