We are starting to hit the Travis 50-minute timeout limit again for BrowserStack-based functional test builds.
Description of the change
Point to the (future) v0.6.2 tag of the cadasta-test repo which includes tests reorganized into 4 batches.
Update tox.ini and .travis.yml to add new references to the 4th batch of functional tests.
Simplify the conditional build config in .travis.yml. First, we move the BROWSERSTACK_USERNAME and the secure BROWSERSTACK_ACCESS_KEY environment variables to the env-global block since they are harmless when unused and are only used if and only if CADASTA_WEB_DRIVER is set to BrowserStack-Chrome, which is controlled in the runtests-functional file. Second, this now makes the pull and push_request conditional jobs for functional tests the same and so we fold them together.
How someone else can test the change
Nothing really aside from checking that the Travis PR build passes.
When should this PR be merged
After Cadasta/cadasta-test#88 has been merged and released as v0.6.2. Checks for this PR will not pass before then.
Risks
None foreseen.
Follow-up actions
None.
Checklist (for reviewing)
General
Is this PR explained thoroughly? All code changes must be accounted for in the PR description.
[ ] Review 1
[ ] Review 2
Is the PR labeled correctly? It should have the migration label if a new migration is added.
[ ] Review 1
[ ] Review 2
Is the risk level assessment sufficient? The risks section should contain all risks that might be introduced with the PR and which actions we need to take to mitigate these risks. Possible risks are database migrations, new libraries that need to be installed or changes to deployment scripts.
[ ] Review 1
[ ] Review 2
Functionality
Are all requirements met? Compare implemented functionality with the requirements specification.
[ ] Review 1
[ ] Review 2
Does the UI work as expected? There should be no Javascript errors in the console; all resources should load. There should be no unexpected errors. Deliberately try to break the feature to find out if there are corner cases that are not handled.
[ ] Review 1
[ ] Review 2
Code
Do you fully understand the introduced changes to the code? If not ask for clarification, it might uncover ways to solve a problem in a more elegant and efficient way.
[ ] Review 1
[ ] Review 2
Does the PR introduce any inefficient database requests? Use the debug server to check for duplicate requests.
[ ] Review 1
[ ] Review 2
Are all necessary strings marked for translation? All strings that are exposed to users via the UI must be marked for translation.
[ ] Review 1
[ ] Review 2
Is the code documented sufficiently? Large and complex classes, functions or methods must be annotated with comments following our code-style guidelines.
[ ] Review 1
[ ] Review 2
Has the scalability of this change been evaluated?
[ ] Review 1
[ ] Review 2
Is there a maintenance plan in place?
[ ] Review 1
[ ] Review 2
Tests
Are there sufficient test cases? Ensure that all components are tested individually; models, forms, and serializers should be tested in isolation even if a test for a view covers these components.
[ ] Review 1
[ ] Review 2
If this is a bug fix, are tests for the issue in place? There must be a test case for the bug to ensure the issue won’t regress. Make sure that the tests break without the new code to fix the issue.
[ ] Review 1
[ ] Review 2
If this is a new feature or a significant change to an existing feature? has the manual testing spreadsheet been updated with instructions for manual testing?
[ ] Review 1
[ ] Review 2
Security
Confirm this PR doesn't commit any keys, passwords, tokens, usernames, or other secrets.
[ ] Review 1
[ ] Review 2
Are all UI and API inputs run through forms or serializers?
[ ] Review 1
[ ] Review 2
Are all external inputs validated and sanitized appropriately?
[ ] Review 1
[ ] Review 2
Does all branching logic have a default case?
[ ] Review 1
[ ] Review 2
Does this solution handle outliers and edge cases gracefully?
[ ] Review 1
[ ] Review 2
Are all external communications secured and restricted to SSL?
[ ] Review 1
[ ] Review 2
Documentation
Are changes to the UI documented in the platform docs? If this PR introduces new platform site functionality or changes existing ones, the changes must be documented in the Cadasta Platform Documentation.
[ ] Review 1
[ ] Review 2
Are changes to the API documented in the API docs? If this PR introduces new API functionality or changes existing ones, the changes must be documented in the API docs.
[ ] Review 1
[ ] Review 2
Are reusable components documented? If this PR introduces components that are relevant to other developers (for instance a mixin for a view or a generic form) they should be documented in the Wiki.
Proposed changes in this pull request
Why I made this change
We are starting to hit the Travis 50-minute timeout limit again for BrowserStack-based functional test builds.
Description of the change
v0.6.2tag of the cadasta-test repo which includes tests reorganized into 4 batches.BROWSERSTACK_USERNAMEand the secureBROWSERSTACK_ACCESS_KEYenvironment variables to theenv-globalblock since they are harmless when unused and are only used if and only ifCADASTA_WEB_DRIVERis set toBrowserStack-Chrome, which is controlled in the runtests-functional file. Second, this now makes thepullandpush_requestconditional jobs for functional tests the same and so we fold them together.How someone else can test the change
Nothing really aside from checking that the Travis PR build passes.
When should this PR be merged
After Cadasta/cadasta-test#88 has been merged and released as
v0.6.2. Checks for this PR will not pass before then.Risks
None foreseen.
Follow-up actions
None.
Checklist (for reviewing)
General
Is this PR explained thoroughly? All code changes must be accounted for in the PR description.
Is the PR labeled correctly? It should have the
migrationlabel if a new migration is added.Is the risk level assessment sufficient? The risks section should contain all risks that might be introduced with the PR and which actions we need to take to mitigate these risks. Possible risks are database migrations, new libraries that need to be installed or changes to deployment scripts.
Functionality
Are all requirements met? Compare implemented functionality with the requirements specification.
Does the UI work as expected? There should be no Javascript errors in the console; all resources should load. There should be no unexpected errors. Deliberately try to break the feature to find out if there are corner cases that are not handled.
Code
Do you fully understand the introduced changes to the code? If not ask for clarification, it might uncover ways to solve a problem in a more elegant and efficient way.
Does the PR introduce any inefficient database requests? Use the debug server to check for duplicate requests.
Are all necessary strings marked for translation? All strings that are exposed to users via the UI must be marked for translation.
Is the code documented sufficiently? Large and complex classes, functions or methods must be annotated with comments following our code-style guidelines.
Has the scalability of this change been evaluated?
Is there a maintenance plan in place?
Tests
Are there sufficient test cases? Ensure that all components are tested individually; models, forms, and serializers should be tested in isolation even if a test for a view covers these components.
If this is a bug fix, are tests for the issue in place? There must be a test case for the bug to ensure the issue won’t regress. Make sure that the tests break without the new code to fix the issue.
If this is a new feature or a significant change to an existing feature? has the manual testing spreadsheet been updated with instructions for manual testing?
Security
Confirm this PR doesn't commit any keys, passwords, tokens, usernames, or other secrets.
Are all UI and API inputs run through forms or serializers?
Are all external inputs validated and sanitized appropriately?
Does all branching logic have a default case?
Does this solution handle outliers and edge cases gracefully?
Are all external communications secured and restricted to SSL?
Documentation
Are changes to the UI documented in the platform docs? If this PR introduces new platform site functionality or changes existing ones, the changes must be documented in the Cadasta Platform Documentation.
Are changes to the API documented in the API docs? If this PR introduces new API functionality or changes existing ones, the changes must be documented in the API docs.
Are reusable components documented? If this PR introduces components that are relevant to other developers (for instance a mixin for a view or a generic form) they should be documented in the Wiki.