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

RHOAIENG-11849 Refactor is required for edit DSP form #1964

Merged

Conversation

ConorOM1
Copy link
Contributor

This fixes an automation bug due to UI changes for Sanity test ODS-2112

Tested on: /devops/job/rhoai-test-flow/1018

image

@ConorOM1 ConorOM1 added verified This PR has been tested with Jenkins enhancements Bugfixes, enhancements, refactoring, ... in tests or libraries (PR will be listed in release-notes) labels Oct 25, 2024
Copy link

Copy link
Contributor

Robot Results

✅ Passed ❌ Failed ⏭️ Skipped Total Pass %
554 0 0 554 100

@@ -456,8 +456,7 @@ Check Resource Name Should Be Immutable
[Documentation] Checks if the Resource Name is not editable
[Arguments] ${project_title}
ODHDashboard.Click Action From Actions Menu item_title=${project_title} item_type=project action=Edit
Wait Until Page Contains Element ${RESOURCE_INPUT_XP}
Element Should Be Disabled ${RESOURCE_INPUT_XP}
Page Should Not Contain Element ${RESOURCE_INPUT_XP}
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I still see the Resource name title and an immutable field below it. So, shouldn't we update the xpath of the RESOURCE_INPUT_XP? Otherwise this check doesn't make sense. What am I missing?
image

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

so the xpath for ${RESOURCE_INPUT_XP} is used for creating a project test, and the changes for ODS-2112 test is to check that its not there when editing a project. WYT ?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Okay, got it. Since we were testing presence of the Element before, I would expect that apart from this Should Not Contain Element, we would also have another Should Contain Element with the xpath to the expected field that is there now.

But I'm not gonna block this.

@ConorOM1 ConorOM1 requested review from jiridanek and CFSNM October 30, 2024 10:11
@manosnoam manosnoam merged commit e3fc547 into red-hat-data-services:master Oct 30, 2024
8 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancements Bugfixes, enhancements, refactoring, ... in tests or libraries (PR will be listed in release-notes) verified This PR has been tested with Jenkins
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants