Upgrade Notebook OfficeJS app
See merge request nexedi/erp5!1275
-
Owner
@rporchetto please note that the testUpgradeInstanceWithOldDataFs has been broken by the dependency change.
-
Owner
and it seems erp5_officejs_support_request_ui_test:testSupportRequest was impacted too
-
Developer
Yes, both tests were impacted by Notebook changes.
For erp5_officejs_support_request_ui_test:testSupportRequest, I checked with Gabriel and confirmed that there is no relation between Notebook portal type and Support Request, so it must be excluded from this test. I fixed here, I'm checking the test results.
Regarding testUpgradeInstanceWithOldDataFs, I used on my instances the promise_check_upgrade alarm with this new dependency and it works fine even without specifying erp5_notebook bt in
Base_getUpgradeBusinessTemplateList
, so I'm fixing this test by adding erp5_notebook to itsgetBusinessTemplateList
here. -
Owner
The failures we have in CodingStyleTest, like
====================================================================== FAIL: test_duplicatingSelectionNameInListbox (CodingStyleTest.CodingStyleTest erp5_corporate_identity) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Traceback (most recent call last): File "/srv/slapgrid/slappart4/srv/testnode/ata/soft/71a5f20c58027433a84962be3a35cd1a/parts/erp5/product/ERP5/tests/testXHTML.py", line 219, in test_duplicatingSelectionNameInListbox portal_skins.SkinsTool_checkDuplicateSelectionName()) AssertionError: Repeated listbox selection names: 'notebook_module_selection' 'NotebookModule_viewNotebookListAsJioForNotebookEditor/listbox': set(['erp5_officejs_notebook']) 'NotebookModule_viewNotebookList/listbox': set(['erp5_notebook'])
also seem to be a consequence of this, because we now install
erp5_notebook
. There have always been a problem with the two duplicate selections in https://lab.nexedi.com/nexedi/erp5/blob/ab420147fb724eef6f177c4a2610b94abbf9f3ba/bt5/erp5_officejs/SkinTemplateItem/portal_skins/erp5_officejs_notebook/NotebookModule_viewNotebookListAsJioForNotebookEditor/listbox.xml#L227 and https://lab.nexedi.com/nexedi/erp5-bin/blob/e0dd805ee9648b716617caf3c6c8a56e8e692127/bt5/erp5_notebook/SkinTemplateItem/portal_skins/erp5_notebook/NotebookModule_viewNotebookList/listbox.xml#L129 but until now we did not see because we were only installing one BT.I don't know if it still make sense to have both
NotebookModule_viewNotebookListAsJioForNotebookEditor/listbox
andNotebookModule_viewNotebookList/listbox
, but how about changing one of the two selection names so that we no longer have this conflict ? -
Developer
Thank you Jérome, I'm on it.
-
Owner
Thanks @rporchetto ! coding style is now passing again on master https://nexedijs.erp5.net/#/test_result_module/20201202-15BEC792
-
Owner
Regarding testUpgradeInstanceWithOldDataFs, I used on my instances the promise_check_upgrade alarm with this new dependency and it works fine even without specifying erp5_notebook bt in
Base_getUpgradeBusinessTemplateList
, so I'm fixing this test by adding erp5_notebook to itsgetBusinessTemplateList
here.The error was:
Module Products.ERP5.Tool.TemplateTool, line 842, in getDependencyList raise BusinessTemplateMissingDependency, 'While analysing %s the following dependency could not be satisfied: %s (%s)\nReason: Business Template could not be found in the repositories'%(bt[1], dependency, version_restriction or '') BusinessTemplateMissingDependency: While analysing erp5_officejs the following dependency could not be satisfied: erp5_notebook () Reason: Business Template could not be found in the repositories
this means the business template is not found in repositories defined here:
I believe that what we need to do is to is adjust the part from the test where this is set, it was only looking for
~/software_release/parts/erp5/bt5
and~/software_release/parts/erp5/product/ERP5/bootstrap
. I did 39d735e4 , directly on master because tests are already broken, I hope it was OK.Edit: I hope it was OK ... with you guys, I ran tests before ;)
-
Developer
This is good news, as I couldn't fix this test yet. Thank you :)