WhatsApp form phase 2 #210
Conversation
* fix: test case for wa form * fix: update test selectors for editing and publishing Whatsapp Forms * fix: refactor form definition to use constant for consistency in Whatsapp Forms tests --------- Co-authored-by: Akansha Sakhre <asakhre2002@gmail.com>
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughThis PR updates the WhatsApp Forms Cypress test suite to align with backend API changes, including restructuring the form definition from a top-level JSON field to a revision object, renaming GraphQL list response fields, updating test selectors, and refactoring form creation/editing test flows. Changes
Estimated code review effort🎯 3 (Moderate) | ⏱️ ~20 minutes Possibly related PRs
Suggested labels
Suggested reviewers
Poem
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 2 | ❌ 1❌ Failed checks (1 inconclusive)
✅ Passed checks (2 passed)
✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings. ✨ Finishing touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://waps.l3s.uni-hannover.de/live/im_/https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Caution
Some comments are outside the diff and can’t be posted inline due to platform limitations.
⚠️ Outside diff range comments (3)
cypress/e2e/wa_forms/wa_form.spec.ts (3)
283-290:⚠️ Potential issue | 🟠 Major
cy.waitis placed before the confirmation click — likely wrong order.Here
cy.wait('@deactivateWhatsappForm')runs beforecy.get('[data-testid="ok-button"]').click(). If clicking the deactivate icon opens a confirmation dialog (as is typical and consistent with the publish test), the API call won't fire until the user confirms, meaningcy.waitwill time out.Compare with the publish test (lines 275-278) where the order is: click icon → click ok-button → wait for API. The deactivate and delete tests appear to have this reversed.
🐛 Proposed fix
it('should make a form inactive', () => { cy.get('[data-testid="deactivate-icon"]').eq(0).click(); - cy.wait('@deactivateWhatsappForm'); - cy.get('[data-testid="ok-button"]').click({ force: true }); + cy.wait('@deactivateWhatsappForm'); cy.get('div').should('contain', 'Form deactivated successfully'); });
299-306:⚠️ Potential issue | 🟠 MajorSame wait-before-confirm issue in the delete test.
Same problem as the deactivate test:
cy.wait('@deleteWhatsappForm')precedes the ok-button click. If deletion requires confirmation, reorder to match the publish test pattern.🐛 Proposed fix
it('should delete a Whatsapp Form', () => { cy.get('[data-testid="DeleteIcon"]').first().click(); - cy.wait('@deleteWhatsappForm'); - cy.get('[data-testid="ok-button"]').click({ force: true }); + cy.wait('@deleteWhatsappForm'); cy.get('div').should('contain', 'Form deleted successfully'); });
300-300:⚠️ Potential issue | 🟡 MinorChange
DeleteIcontodelete-iconfor consistency with other action icons in this file.Line 300 uses
DeleteIcon(PascalCase), while all other action icons inwa_form.spec.tsuse kebab-case:edit-icon(line 248),publish-icon(line 275),deactivate-icon(line 284), andactivate-icon(line 293). Additionally,delete-iconis used elsewhere in the codebase (e.g.,waPolls.spec.tsline 47).
🧹 Nitpick comments (2)
cypress/e2e/wa_forms/wa_form.spec.ts (2)
225-232: UnusedformJsonvariable — dead code.
formJsonis declared but never referenced in the test body. It appears to be a leftover from a previous version of this test that typed JSON directly into a form field.🧹 Proposed fix
it('should create a new Whatsapp Form', () => { - const formJson = { - type: 'form', - title: 'Sample Form', - fields: [ - { type: 'text', label: 'Name' }, - { type: 'email', label: 'Email' }, - ], - }; cy.get('[data-testid="newItemButton"]').click();
9-214: Consider consolidating intercepts into a single handler to reduce fragility.All eight
cy.intercept('POST', '**/api', ...)calls match the same URL pattern. Each one guards onoperationName, but if a request'soperationNamedoesn't match any guard, it silently falls through to the real server — which can cause flaky failures in CI. A single intercept with a switch/map onoperationNameis easier to maintain and makes unhandled operations explicit.♻️ Sketch
cy.intercept('POST', '**/api', (req) => { const handlers: Record<string, (req: any) => void> = { CreateWhatsappForm: (req) => req.reply({ ... }), listWhatsappForms: (req) => req.reply({ ... }), WhatsappForm: (req) => req.reply({ ... }), // ... other operations }; const handler = handlers[req.body.operationName]; if (handler) handler(req); // else: optionally fail or let it pass through }).as('graphql');
1 participant
Whatsapp form phase 2
Summary by CodeRabbit