* web/wdio-2:
remove hooks
add basic CI
prettier run
add dependabot
update package name
fix blueprints
web: improve testing by adding test admin user via blueprint
This commit continues the application wizard buildout. In this commit are the following changes:
- Fixed a width-setting bug in the Makefile `make help` feature (i.e "automate that stuff!")
- Added Radius to the list of providers we can offer via the wizard
- Added `launchUrl` and `UI Settings` to features of the application page the wizard can find
- Changed 'SAML Manual Configuration' to just say "SAML Configuration"
- Modified `ak-form-group` to take and honor the `aria-label` property (which in turn makes it
easier to target specific forms with unit testing)
- Reduced the log level for wdio to 'warn'; 'info' was super-spammy and not helpful. It can be put
back with `--logLevel info` from the command line.
- Added SCIM to the list of available providers
- Fixed ForwardProxy so that its mode is set correctly. (This is a special case in the committer;
I'm unhappy with that.)
- Fixed the commit messages so that:
- icons are set correctly (Success, Danger, Working)
- icons are colored correctly according to state
- commit message includes a `data-commit-state` field so tests can find it!
- Merged the application wizard tests into a single test pass
- Isolated common parts of the application wizard tests to reduce unnecessary repetition. All
application tests are the same until you reach the provider section anyway.
- Fixed the unit tests so they're finding the right error messages and are enabled to display them
correctly.
- Moved the test Form handlers into their own folder so they're not cluttering up the Pages folder.
* web/wdio-2:
web/test: changed the name of one test to reflect it's 'good' status
web/adding tests: added comments and cleaned up some administrative features.
web/add webdriverIO testing layer
This commit adds WebdriverIO as an end-to-end solution to unit testing. WebdriverIO can be run both
locally and remotely, supports strong integration with web components, and is generally robust for
use in pipelines. I'll confess to working through a tutorial on how to do this for web components,
and this is just chapter 2 (I think there are 5 or so chapters...).
There's a makefile, with help! If you just run `make` it tells you:
```
Specify a command. The choices are:
help Show this help
node_modules Runs `npm install` to prepare this feature
precommit Run the precommit: spell check all comments, eslint with sonarJS, prettier-write
test-good-login Test that we can log into the server. Requires a running instance of the server.
test-bad-login Test that bad usernames and passwords create appropriate error messages
```
... because Makefiles are documentation, and documentation belongs in Makefiles.
I've chosen to go with a PageObject-oriented low-level DSL; what that means is that for each major
components (a page, a form, a wizard), there's a class that provides human-readable names for
human-interactable and human-viewable objects on the page. The LoginPage object, for example, has
selectors for the username, password, submit button, and the failure alert; accessing those allows
us to test for items as expected., and to write a DSL for "a good login" that's as straightforward
as:
```
await LoginPage.open();
await LoginPage.login("ken@goauthentik.io", "eat10bugs");
await expect(UserLibraryPage.pageHeader).toHaveText("My applications");
```
There was a *lot* of messing around with the LoginPage to get the username and password into the
system. For example, I had to do this with all the `waitForClickable` and `waitForEnable` because
we both keep the buttons inaccessible until the form has something and we "black out" the page (put
a darkening filter over it) while accessing the flow, meaning there was a race condition such that
the test would attempt to interact with the username or password field before it was accessible.
But this works now, which is very nice.
``` JavaScript
get inputUsername() {
return $('>>>input[name="uidField"]');
}
get btnSubmit() {
return $('>>>button[type="submit"]');
}
async username(username: string) {
await this.inputUsername.waitForClickable();
await this.inputUsername.setValue(username);
await this.btnSubmit.waitForEnabled();
await this.btnSubmit.click();
}
```
The bells & whistles of *Prettier*, *Eslint*, and *Codespell* have also been enabled. I do like my
guardrails.
This commit replaces the previous WDIO instance with a more formal and straightforward process using
the [pageobjects](https://martinfowler.com/bliki/PageObject.html). In this form, every major
component has its own test suite, and a test is a sequence of exercises of those components.
A test then becomes something as straightforward as:
```
await LoginPage.open();
await LoginPage.login("ken@goauthentik.io", "eat10bugs");
expect(await UserLibraryPage.pageHeader).toHaveText("My Applications");
await UserLibraryPage.goToAdmin();
expect(await AdminOverviewPage.pageHeader).toHaveText("Welcome, ");
await AdminOverviewPage.openApplicationsListPage();
expect(await ApplicationsListPage.pageHeader).toHaveText("Applications");
ApplicationsListPage.startCreateApplicationWizard();
await ApplicationWizard.app.name.setValue(`Test application ${newId}`);
await ApplicationWizard.nextButton.click();
await (await ApplicationWizard.getProviderType("ldapprovider")).click();
await ApplicationWizard.nextButton.click();
await ApplicationWizard.ldap.setBindFlow("default-authentication-flow");
await ApplicationWizard.nextButton.click();
await expect(await ApplicationWizard.commitMessage).toHaveText(
"Your application has been saved"
);
```
Whether or not there's another layer of DSL in there or not, this is a pretty nice idiom for
maintaining tests.
After working with the navigation for awhile, I realized that it's a poor map; what I really wanted was
a controller/view pair, where events flow up to the controller and then messages on "what to draw" flow
down to the view. It work quite well, and the wizard frame is smaller and smarter for it.
I've also moved the WDIO-driven tests into the 'tests' folder, because it (a) makes more sense to put
them there, and (b) it prevents any confusion about who's in charge of node_modules.
Ken Sternberg
Jens Langhammer