Add unit tests for integration config form

Review Request #10830 — Created Jan. 17, 2020 and submitted

bui1
Djblets
release-1.0.x
4589
6096d6a...
djblets

Add test scenarios that include checking if
the integration config form saves properly,
and gets/sets key values for the enabled and
name form fields included in the form.

All unit tests pass including with the new ones

All unit tests pass including with the new ones.

Description From Last Updated

Can you add a docstring at the top of the file? Just a one-line summary. Unit tests for <full class ...

chipx86chipx86

Please add the bug number to the "Bugs" field on the review request.

daviddavid

Please move the last part of your description (about tests passing) to the "Testing Done" field. That also needs a ...

daviddavid

The lines in the description should wrap at 79 columns. Currently the first is 87 columns. As a tip, you'll ...

chipx86chipx86

There's a particular order that imports need to be grouped in (blank lines separating them): Python-provided modules Third-party modules (from ...

chipx86chipx86

Mind naming this request_factory? We try to avoid abbreviations, since it's harder to search for them, and isn't self-descriptive.

chipx86chipx86

Let's rename this to just form. class_under_test isn't actually very self-describing.

chipx86chipx86

This will be a lot easier to read and maintain (and fit under 79 characters) as: self.form = IntegrationConfigForm( integration=self.integration, ...

chipx86chipx86

E501 line too long (100 > 79 characters)

reviewbotreviewbot

E501 line too long (106 > 79 characters)

reviewbotreviewbot

These docstrings are shown when running the test suite, and since there's usually so many (thousands in Review Board!), it's ...

chipx86chipx86

Rather than testing whether this returns a value, how about testing that it's the exact value we're expecting?

chipx86chipx86

E501 line too long (97 > 79 characters)

reviewbotreviewbot

It's confusing that there's two name for this... We try to stick with the singular form, assertEqual. (We don't always ...

chipx86chipx86

E501 line too long (109 > 79 characters)

reviewbotreviewbot

E501 line too long (97 > 79 characters)

reviewbotreviewbot

E501 line too long (90 > 79 characters)

reviewbotreviewbot

E501 line too long (112 > 79 characters)

reviewbotreviewbot

We never want to use the u prefix on any strings. We get those automatically from the from __future__ import ...

chipx86chipx86

Please add a class docstring for this (can be the same as your module docstring).

daviddavid

This line should have a comma at the end.

daviddavid

Missing a period at the end of this.

chipx86chipx86

This is missing a period at the end.

chipx86chipx86

Super minor nit, but it's common to have a blank line after the super() call. Helps to think of code ...

chipx86chipx86

I think the docstrings here aren't really descriptive enough. I'm having trouble understanding from them what we're testing. The first ...

chipx86chipx86

Oh, just realized. You'll want assertIsInstance here. It's a nice alternative, because if the test fails, it'll provide more useful ...

chipx86chipx86

Looks like this is wrapping too early. It should be closer to 79 characters. Same with the ones below.

chipx86chipx86

E501 line too long (89 > 79 characters)

reviewbotreviewbot

E501 line too long (86 > 79 characters)

reviewbotreviewbot
Checks run (1 failed, 1 succeeded)
flake8 failed.
JSHint passed.

flake8

chipx86
  1. 
      
  2. Can you add a docstring at the top of the file? Just a one-line summary. Unit tests for <full class path>. is good.

  3. djblets/integrations/tests/test_forms.py (Diff revision 1)
     
     
     
     
     
     
     

    There's a particular order that imports need to be grouped in (blank lines separating them):

    1. Python-provided modules
    2. Third-party modules (from the perspective of the project you're working with)
    3. Project's own modules

    And these must all be in alphabetical order. Skip any groups that don't have modules.

    So in your case, the django ones would be in its own group at the top, then a blank line, then the djblets ones. Alphabetical.

  4. Mind naming this request_factory? We try to avoid abbreviations, since it's harder to search for them, and isn't self-descriptive.

  5. Let's rename this to just form. class_under_test isn't actually very self-describing.

  6. djblets/integrations/tests/test_forms.py (Diff revision 1)
     
     
     
     

    This will be a lot easier to read and maintain (and fit under 79 characters) as:

    self.form = IntegrationConfigForm(
        integration=self.integration,
        request=self.request,
        instance=None,
        data={
            'enabled': True,
            'name': self.mock_name,
        })
    

    Note also the keyword arguments. Being explicit here is really good when there's a lot of arguments going on.

    Also also, note the self.mock_name. No need to reference the class name directly.

    I think we're only using that name once, so we can probably even nuke the class attribute.

  7. These docstrings are shown when running the test suite, and since there's usually so many (thousands in Review Board!), it's very important that they're explicit. They should always include the thing being tested. So you'd probably want something like:

    """Testing IntegrationConfigForm.config returns the configuration instance"""
    

    Or IntegrationConfigForm.get_key_value() below, etc.

  8. djblets/integrations/tests/test_forms.py (Diff revision 1)
     
     
     

    Rather than testing whether this returns a value, how about testing that it's the exact value we're expecting?

  9. It's confusing that there's two name for this... We try to stick with the singular form, assertEqual. (We don't always get it right -- there's a few stragglers in the codebase.)

  10. We never want to use the u prefix on any strings. We get those automatically from the from __future__ import unicode_literals at the top on Python 2.x, and it's the default for 3.x.

  11. 
      
bui1
david
  1. Just a few style-related comments:

  2. Please add the bug number to the "Bugs" field on the review request.

  3. Please move the last part of your description (about tests passing) to the "Testing Done" field. That also needs a period.

  4. Please add a class docstring for this (can be the same as your module docstring).

  5. This line should have a comma at the end.

  6. 
      
bui1
bui1
chipx86
  1. This is coming along nicely! I have a few suggestions on docstrings, to help make them more self-descriptive.

  2. Missing a period at the end of this.

  3. This is missing a period at the end.

  4. djblets/integrations/tests/test_forms.py (Diff revision 3)
     
     
     

    Super minor nit, but it's common to have a blank line after the super() call. Helps to think of code like paragraphs. One paragraph is "We're calling the parent method and setting up all of its state." Next paragraph is "We're setting up the basic objects needed to work with integrations." Paragraph after is "We're setting up state for the form."

  5. djblets/integrations/tests/test_forms.py (Diff revision 3)
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     

    I think the docstrings here aren't really descriptive enough. I'm having trouble understanding from them what we're testing.

    The first test says it's testing a default field, but the first thing we check is actually a value provided to the form (form data filled in by a user and POSTed to the page). I think this is really testing that "get_key_value() returns values from form data"

    The second, I don't think "default field" makes any sense in the context. I think it's more that "set_key_value() overrides form data"?

    The third is more correct but maybe vague? How about "set_key_value() sets custom non-field data"?

  6. 
      
bui1
mike_conley
  1. This looks good to me. Thanks, Monica!

  2. 
      
chipx86
  1. Juuuust about there!

  2. The lines in the description should wrap at 79 columns. Currently the first is 87 columns.

    As a tip, you'll usually get a column limit when composing a Git commit in your editor, helping to stay under this limit. If you modify the commit after the review request is posted, you can update the information on the review request from the commit by passing -g yes when running your rbt post -u.

  3. Oh, just realized. You'll want assertIsInstance here. It's a nice alternative, because if the test fails, it'll provide more useful information about the types.

  4. djblets/integrations/tests/test_forms.py (Diff revision 4)
     
     
     

    Looks like this is wrapping too early. It should be closer to 79 characters.

    Same with the ones below.

    1. I've made the changes but flake8 suggests that having the entire docstring on one line is too long so i'll make the change to wrap it later

  5. 
      
bui1
Review request changed

Description:

~  

Add test scenarios that include checking if the integration config form saves properly,

~   and gets/sets key values for the enabled and name form fields included with the form.

  ~

Add test scenarios that include checking

  ~ if the integration config form saves properly,
  + and gets/sets key values for the enabled and
  + name form fields included in the form.

Commit:

-e5e2792b3dcb7e4f27853327128335b7c51a9fd5
+ab3079815c30d07e4c2da234e95fcb6d60e26bf2

Diff:

Revision 5 (+68)

Show changes

Checks run (1 failed, 1 succeeded)

flake8 failed.
JSHint passed.

flake8

bui1
david
  1. Ship It!
  2. 
      
bui1
Review request changed

Status: Closed (submitted)

Change Summary:

Pushed to release-2.0.x (ebb4fe6)
Loading...