In the acceptance tests the link share menu is automatically opened if
needed before interacting with an item in the menu; if the menu is not
open it is opened by clicking on its toggle.
However, since a recent change the link share menu is automatically
opened by the regular UI after the link share is created. This causes
that, sometimes, after the creation of a link share the acceptance tests
check whether the menu is shown or not before the menu was automatically
opened; as the menu is not open then the acceptance tests proceed to
click on the toggle, but in the meantime the link share was created and
the menu opened, so clicking on the toggle now closes it. As the menu is
closed it is not possible to interact with its items and the test fails.
To prevent that now the acceptance tests wait for the link share menu to
open after a link share is created before continuing with the other
steps.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Calviño Sánchez <danxuliu@gmail.com>
Although now it is possible to create several link shares the acceptance
tests currently handles only the first link share; this first link share
is now created by clicking an "Add new share" button instead of a
checkbox.
Besides that, the "Copy link" button has been moved from the menu to the
row, next to the menu trigger.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Calviño Sánchez <danxuliu@gmail.com>
The share link UI no longer uses its own layout below the other shares;
now it is shown as a share row with a menu for the actions (except
enabling it, which is shown in the row itself), just like the other
shares.
The share link is no longer shown, either; now the link is got by
clicking on a "Copy URL" menu item, which copies the link to the
clipboard. As the clipboard is not accessible from the acceptance tests
the URL is now extracted from the attributes of that menu item (although
the menu item is clicked anyway to mimic the user behaviour).
Signed-off-by: Daniel Calviño Sánchez <danxuliu@gmail.com>
Before, each section of the Files app ("All files", "Favorites"...) had
its own sidebar element. Now there is a single sidebar element for all
the sections in the Files app.
Signed-off-by: John Molakvoæ (skjnldsv) <skjnldsv@protonmail.com>
The "FileListContext" provides steps to interact with and check the
behaviour of a file list. However, the "FileListContext" does not know
the right file list ancestor that has to be used by the file list steps,
so until now the file list steps were explicitly wired to the Files app
and they could be used only in that case.
Instead of duplicating the steps with a slightly different name (for
example, "I create a new folder named :folderName in the public shared
folder" instead of "I create a new folder named :folderName") the steps
were generalized; now contexts that "know" that certain file list
ancestor has to be used by the FileListContext steps performed by
certain actor from that point on (until changed again) set it
explicitly. For example, when the current page is the Files app then the
ancestor of the file list is the main view of the current section of the
Files app, but when the current page is a shared link then the ancestor
is set to null (because there will be just one file list, and thus its
ancestor is not relevant to differentiate between instances)
A helper trait, "FileListAncestorSetter", was introduced to reduce the
boilerplate needed to set the file list ancestor from other contexts.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Calviño Sánchez <danxuliu@gmail.com>
The file list is used in other places besides the Files app (for
example, the File sharing app); in those cases the locators for the file
list elements are the same, but not for the ancestor of the file list.
To make possible to reuse the file list locators in those cases too now
they receive the ancestor to use.
Note that the locators for the file actions menu were not using an
ancestor locator because it is expected that there is only one file
actions menu at a time in the whole page; that may change in the future,
but for the time being it is a valid assumption and thus the ancestor
was not added to those locators in this commit.
Although the locators were generalized the steps themselves still use
the "FilesAppContext::currentSectionMainView" locator as ancestor; the
steps will be generalized in a following commit.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Calviño Sánchez <danxuliu@gmail.com>
Besides the extraction some minor adjustments (sorting locators for file
action menu entries to reflect the order of the menu entries in the UI,
moving parametrized locators like "createMenuItemFor" above the locators
that use them and placing "descendantOf" calls always in a new line)
were made too.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Calviño Sánchez <danxuliu@gmail.com>
When clicking on "Share link" in the "Sharing" tab of the Files app an
input field with the link appears. That input field already exists in
the DOM, although empty, before clicking on "Share link", and when that
is done the proper value is set and then the input field is shown.
In the acceptance tests "getValue()" can return the value of hidden
elements too, so as long as an element exists its value is returned
without waiting for the field to be visible. Due to this if the test
code runs too fast the "I write down the shared link" step could be
executed before the proper value was set, so the shared link got in that
case would be an empty value, and this would lead to failures when the
following steps were executed.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Calviño Sánchez <danxuliu@gmail.com>
Firefox and Chrome drivers for Selenium refuse to click on an element if
the point to be clicked is covered by a different element, throwing an
UnknownError exception with message "Element is not clickable at point
({x}, {y}). Other element would receive the click: {element}". Although
in general that would be a legit error (as the user would not be able to
click on the element) due to a bad layout, sometimes this can be just a
temporal issue caused by an animation, in which case there would be no
problem once the animation finished and the elements are all in their
final location.
Unfortunately, automatically handling those situations in which the
problem is caused by an animation by just retrying a few times if the
element to be clicked is covered before giving up would probably cause
confusion instead of easing test writing.
The reason is that if the center of the element is covered by another
one the Firefox driver for Selenium tries to click on the corners of the
element instead. The problem is that the coordinates used for the click
are integer values, but Firefox has sub-pixel accuracy, so sometimes
(depending on which corner is not covered and whether the left, top,
width or height properties of the element to be clicked have a decimal
component or not) the clicks silently land on a different HTML element
(and that is with squared borders; with round borders they always land
on a different HTML element. That was partially addressed for Selenium
3.0 by clicking first on the edges, but it would still fail if the
middle point of the edges is covered but not the corners).
It is not possible to fix or even detect all that from the tests (except
maybe with some extreme hacks involving accessing private PHP members
from Mink and bypassing or replacing the standard JavaScript executed by
the Firefox driver with a custom implementation...), so it is not
possible to ensure that clicks during an animation will land on the
right element (in fact it is not possible even on static elements,
although except when the layout is wrong there should be no problem);
sometimes retrying a click when the element is covered would solve the
problem, sometimes it would cause a different element to be clicked (and
sometimes there would be even no retry, as the first click would have
silently landed on a different element than the expected one).
Therefore, a different approach must be used. Instead of trying to
automatically handle clicks during animations the tests must be written
being aware of the problem and thus waiting somehow for the animations
that can cause a problem to end before performing the clicks.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Calviño Sánchez <danxuliu@gmail.com>
This is a preparatory step for a following commit in which the position
of the favorite icon and the checkbox will be swapped; in that new
design the favorite icon is no longer expected to be an action but just
a simple mark on whether the file is favorited or not (the action is
expected to be triggered then only from the file actions menu).
The favorite icon is now fully shown or completely hidden depending on
whether the file is favorited or not. As the icon is just informative
but no longer an action now it does not change when hovered or focus. In
the same way, the alternative text when the file is not favorited now it
is not "Favorite" (an action) but "Not favorited" instead.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Calviño Sánchez <danxuliu@gmail.com>
Currently a file can be favorited either through the inline action or
through the file actions menu. However, the inline action will be
removed in a following commit and then it will be possible to do it only
through the file actions menu.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Calviño Sánchez <danxuliu@gmail.com>
The app navigation is not exclusive to the Files app but a generic
component used by other apps too, so its locators and steps should be in
its own context.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Calviño Sánchez <danxuliu@gmail.com>
Acceptance tests opened the details view by clicking on the middle of
the file row, but due to the changes made in issue #4921 that now opens
the file instead; this commit updates the acceptance tests to open the
details view through the "Details" item in the file actions menu.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Calviño Sánchez <danxuliu@gmail.com>
The "content" locator uses the "named" Mink selector and the "content"
Mink locator to find the element. The "named" Mink first tries to find
the elements whose content match exactly the given content but, if none
is found, then it tries to find elements that just contain the given
content.
This behaviour can lead to hard to track issues. Finding the exact match
and, if not found, finding the partial match is done in quick
succession. In most cases, when looking for an exact match the element
is already there, it is returned, and everything works as expected. Or
it may not be there, but then it is not there either when finding the
partial match, so no element is returned, and everything works as
expected (that is, the actor tries to find again the element after some
time).
However, it can also happen that when looking for an exact match there
is no element yet, but it appears after trying to find the exact match
but before trying to find the partial match. In that situation the
desired element would be returned along with its ancestors. However, as
only the first found element is taken into account and the ancestors
would appear first the find action would be successful, but the returned
element would not be the expected one. This is highly unlikely, yet
possible, and can cause sporadic failures in acceptance tests that,
apparently, work as expected.
Using a "named_exact" Mink selector instead of the "named" Mink selector
does not provide the desired behaviour in most cases either. As it finds
any element whose content matches exactly the given content, looking for
"Hello world" in "<div><p><a>Hello world</a></p></div>" would match the
"div", "p" and "a" elements; in that situation the "div" element would
be the one returned, when typically the "a" element would be the
expected one.
As it is error prone and easily replaceable by more robust locators the
"content" locator was removed from the predefined ones (although it can
still be used if needed through the "customSelector" method in the
builder object).
Signed-off-by: Daniel Calviño Sánchez <danxuliu@gmail.com>
John Molakvoæ (skjnldsv)
Daniel Calviño Sánchez
Roeland Jago Douma
Jan-Christoph Borchardt