fix(attachment): fix the bug that image, video and audio can not be accepted as file #301
Conversation
…io can not be accepted as file
WalkthroughThe changes involve updates to the Changes
Poem
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
- src/attachments/attachments.module.ts (1 hunks)
- test/attachments.e2e-spec.ts (5 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments not posted (6)
src/attachments/attachments.module.ts (1)
67-67: Approve change with considerations for clarity and security.The modification successfully addresses the PR objective by allowing image, video, and audio files to be accepted as 'file' type. This change aligns with the goal of fixing the bug where these file types couldn't be accepted.
However, consider the following points:
Potential confusion: The 'file' type now accepts all MIME types that are also accepted by specific types (image, video, audio). This overlap might lead to confusion in usage and maintenance.
Security implications: Ensure that the application is prepared to handle these new file types securely, especially when processing or storing them.
Downstream impact: Verify that any downstream processing or storage mechanisms can handle these additional file types correctly.
To ensure that this change doesn't introduce unintended consequences, please run the following verification:
This will help identify any areas in the codebase that might need to be updated to handle the new file types correctly.
test/attachments.e2e-spec.ts (5)
18-22: LGTM: New variable declarations for file IDs.The new variables
ImageAsFileId,VideoAsFileId, andAudioAsFileIdare well-named and consistently follow the existing naming convention. The use of type annotations (: number) is good for maintaining type safety.
99-109: LGTM: New test case for uploading an image as a file.This test case correctly verifies the ability to upload an image file with the 'file' type. It follows the existing test structure and includes appropriate assertions for the response code, message, and presence of an ID. The file ID is properly stored for later use.
121-131: LGTM: New test case for uploading a video as a file.This test case correctly verifies the ability to upload a video file with the 'file' type. It follows the existing test structure and includes appropriate assertions for the response code, message, and presence of an ID. The file ID is properly stored for later use.
143-153: LGTM: New test case for uploading an audio file as a file.This test case correctly verifies the ability to upload an audio file with the 'file' type. It follows the existing test structure and includes appropriate assertions for the response code, message, and presence of an ID. The file ID is properly stored for later use.
Line range hint
1-264: Overall assessment: Good additions with room for improvement.The new test cases effectively address the PR objective of fixing the bug where image, video, and audio couldn't be accepted as files. The additions improve test coverage and follow the existing test structure consistently.
Strengths:
- New variables are well-named and typed.
- Upload test cases correctly verify the ability to upload different file types as 'file'.
- The changes align well with the existing codebase structure.
Areas for improvement:
- The retrieval test cases for the newly uploaded files (lines 220-240) could be more thorough, as mentioned in the previous comment.
Once the retrieval test cases are enhanced, these changes will provide robust coverage for the new functionality.
| it('should get the uploaded file detail', async () => { | ||
| const respond = await request(app.getHttpServer()) | ||
| .get(`/attachments/${ImageAsFileId}`) | ||
| .set('Authorization', `Bearer ${TestToken}`) | ||
| .send(); | ||
| expect(respond.status).toBe(200); | ||
| }); | ||
| it('should get the uploaded file detail', async () => { | ||
| const respond = await request(app.getHttpServer()) | ||
| .get(`/attachments/${VideoAsFileId}`) | ||
| .set('Authorization', `Bearer ${TestToken}`) | ||
| .send(); | ||
| expect(respond.status).toBe(200); | ||
| }); | ||
| it('should get the uploaded file detail', async () => { | ||
| const respond = await request(app.getHttpServer()) | ||
| .get(`/attachments/${AudioAsFileId}`) | ||
| .set('Authorization', `Bearer ${TestToken}`) | ||
| .send(); | ||
| expect(respond.status).toBe(200); | ||
| }); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Enhance new test cases for retrieving uploaded file details.
While the new test cases correctly verify that the uploaded files can be retrieved, they could be more thorough:
- The test cases only check for a successful response status (200).
- Unlike other retrieval tests in this file, they don't verify any specific file details or metadata.
To improve these tests:
- Add assertions to check for specific file metadata (e.g., size, MIME type) as done in other retrieval tests.
- Verify that the 'type' field in the response is 'file' for these uploads.
- Consider checking that the metadata matches the original file properties.
Example improvement for the image file test:
it('should get the uploaded image file detail', async () => {
const respond = await request(app.getHttpServer())
.get(`/attachments/${ImageAsFileId}`)
.set('Authorization', `Bearer ${TestToken}`)
.send();
expect(respond.status).toBe(200);
expect(respond.body.data.attachment.type).toBe('file');
expect(respond.body.data.attachment.meta.mime).toBe('image/jpeg');
expect(respond.body.data.attachment.meta.size).toEqual(53102); // Adjust to actual file size
});Apply similar improvements to the video and audio file retrieval tests.
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## dev #301 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 91.74% 91.74%
=======================================
Files 70 70
Lines 2724 2724
Branches 377 377
=======================================
Hits 2499 2499
Misses 225 225 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
No description provided.