Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Feb 6, 2023. It is now read-only.

Fix isHTMLBRElement test #2278

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Fix isHTMLBRElement test #2278

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

yangshun
Copy link
Contributor

@yangshun yangshun commented Dec 7, 2019

Summary

In the Facebook repo mirror, modules in Jest tests are not mocked, but on GitHub they are (as seen from package.json). That led to D18831442 passing internally in Sandcastle but failing on Travis. Not a huge deal, we can just add jest.disableAutomock().

We might want to see if we can remove "automock": true, from the Jest config in package.json to have a more similar environment to Facebook's Jest config.

Test Plan

Travis CI should pass now.

Copy link

@facebook-github-bot facebook-github-bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@yangshun has imported this pull request. If you are a Facebook employee, you can view this diff on Phabricator.

@claudiopro
Copy link
Contributor

Good catch, thanks @yangshun!

@facebook-github-bot
Copy link

@yangshun merged this pull request in 0603772.

facebook-github-bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 10, 2019
Summary:
**Summary**

Saw that the Travis CI is failing because of a new test (`isHTMLBRElement`) which did not explicitly disable auto mocking. In Sandcastle, Jest tests aren't automocked hence the tests passed internally but is failing on GitHub.

Since all the tests in the repo have `jest.disableAutomock()`, there's no value in having `automock: true` within `package.json`, we can remove it and save ourselves of this config discrepancy and further pain in future.

If we decide to go with this approach then #2278 can be abandoned/closed.

**Test Plan**

Travis CI should pass. Also check that Sandcastle passes.
Pull Request resolved: #2279

Reviewed By: mrkev

Differential Revision: D18874249

Pulled By: yangshun

fbshipit-source-id: e371558552728b395f67bf1c4d94b127cc3c2c96
mmissey pushed a commit to mmissey/draft-js that referenced this pull request Mar 24, 2020
Summary:
**Summary**

In the Facebook repo mirror, modules in Jest tests are not mocked, but on GitHub they are (as seen from `package.json`). That led to D18831442 passing internally in Sandcastle but failing on Travis. Not a huge deal, we can just add `jest.disableAutomock()`.

We might want to see if we can remove `"automock": true,` from the Jest config in `package.json` to have a more similar environment to Facebook's Jest config.

**Test Plan**

Travis CI should pass now.
Pull Request resolved: facebookarchive#2278

Differential Revision: D18874041

Pulled By: yangshun

fbshipit-source-id: 282c137934dea27259a2b52741c749fb6c332323
mmissey pushed a commit to mmissey/draft-js that referenced this pull request Mar 24, 2020
Summary:
**Summary**

Saw that the Travis CI is failing because of a new test (`isHTMLBRElement`) which did not explicitly disable auto mocking. In Sandcastle, Jest tests aren't automocked hence the tests passed internally but is failing on GitHub.

Since all the tests in the repo have `jest.disableAutomock()`, there's no value in having `automock: true` within `package.json`, we can remove it and save ourselves of this config discrepancy and further pain in future.

If we decide to go with this approach then facebookarchive#2278 can be abandoned/closed.

**Test Plan**

Travis CI should pass. Also check that Sandcastle passes.
Pull Request resolved: facebookarchive#2279

Reviewed By: mrkev

Differential Revision: D18874249

Pulled By: yangshun

fbshipit-source-id: e371558552728b395f67bf1c4d94b127cc3c2c96
vilemj-Viclick pushed a commit to kontent-ai/draft-js that referenced this pull request Jul 16, 2020
Summary:
**Summary**

In the Facebook repo mirror, modules in Jest tests are not mocked, but on GitHub they are (as seen from `package.json`). That led to D18831442 passing internally in Sandcastle but failing on Travis. Not a huge deal, we can just add `jest.disableAutomock()`.

We might want to see if we can remove `"automock": true,` from the Jest config in `package.json` to have a more similar environment to Facebook's Jest config.

**Test Plan**

Travis CI should pass now.
Pull Request resolved: facebookarchive#2278

Differential Revision: D18874041

Pulled By: yangshun

fbshipit-source-id: 282c137934dea27259a2b52741c749fb6c332323
vilemj-Viclick pushed a commit to kontent-ai/draft-js that referenced this pull request Jul 16, 2020
Summary:
**Summary**

Saw that the Travis CI is failing because of a new test (`isHTMLBRElement`) which did not explicitly disable auto mocking. In Sandcastle, Jest tests aren't automocked hence the tests passed internally but is failing on GitHub.

Since all the tests in the repo have `jest.disableAutomock()`, there's no value in having `automock: true` within `package.json`, we can remove it and save ourselves of this config discrepancy and further pain in future.

If we decide to go with this approach then facebookarchive#2278 can be abandoned/closed.

**Test Plan**

Travis CI should pass. Also check that Sandcastle passes.
Pull Request resolved: facebookarchive#2279

Reviewed By: mrkev

Differential Revision: D18874249

Pulled By: yangshun

fbshipit-source-id: e371558552728b395f67bf1c4d94b127cc3c2c96
alicayan008 pushed a commit to alicayan008/draft-js that referenced this pull request Jul 4, 2023
Summary:
**Summary**

In the Facebook repo mirror, modules in Jest tests are not mocked, but on GitHub they are (as seen from `package.json`). That led to D18831442 passing internally in Sandcastle but failing on Travis. Not a huge deal, we can just add `jest.disableAutomock()`.

We might want to see if we can remove `"automock": true,` from the Jest config in `package.json` to have a more similar environment to Facebook's Jest config.

**Test Plan**

Travis CI should pass now.
Pull Request resolved: facebookarchive/draft-js#2278

Differential Revision: D18874041

Pulled By: yangshun

fbshipit-source-id: 282c137934dea27259a2b52741c749fb6c332323
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants