-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5k
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: fix flaky snap signature test #29480
Merged
+13
−3
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
10 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
69bafed
test: fix flaky snap signature test
pnarayanaswamy f1ac41e
chore: increase delay
pnarayanaswamy 39d85fa
chore: change selector for arrow
pnarayanaswamy 180a903
Merge branch 'main' into fix-flaky-snaps-test
pnarayanaswamy 8bfeb48
chore: reduce delay
pnarayanaswamy 065893f
Merge branch 'fix-flaky-snaps-test' of github.com:MetaMask/metamask-e…
pnarayanaswamy 0150013
chore: remove ff job
pnarayanaswamy 73d76e5
Merge branch 'main' into fix-flaky-snaps-test
pnarayanaswamy 21517af
Merge branch 'fix-flaky-snaps-test' of github.com:MetaMask/metamask-e…
pnarayanaswamy cc6dba9
Merge branch 'main' into fix-flaky-snaps-test
pnarayanaswamy File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains 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
This file contains 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
Oops, something went wrong.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Doesn't the below
clickElementSafe
also wait for the selector, or does it take so long we need to wait twice as long and we can't change the timeout?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The clickElementSafe waits for elementsLocated, while the selector is waiting for it to be visible both serve different purposes. When an element exists in the dom it does not necessarily mean it is visible/interactable on the page hence the extra check. Also the wait is an intelligent one, so as soon as the condition is met it moves on, so we don't really add any extra time to the test if the element is present. The timeout is just the max time it waits before failing.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sorry for the confusion, I'm aware the timeout isn't fixed, I was asking if there was a big delay in the test meaning we needed to wait twice to generate a sufficient delay.
Out of scope for this PR, but if one method is silently checking visibility, and the other just whether it exists, perhaps we could benefit from a
requireVisible
property onclickElementSafe
to minimise duplication like this.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Makes sense, I'll make that change in another PR.