Exclude Feature or Scenario by Tag #433

Wil75 · 2017-02-14T16:48:08Z

I use Pickles in order to generate Living documentation. I faced the same issue described in: Idea: Exclude Scenarios or Features by tags #18

An IgnoreTag feature has been added: ignore some scenarios or features during living documentation generation
IgnoreTag parameter has been implemented for all runners

dirkrombauts · 2017-02-14T17:02:44Z

Thanks for this contribution! I will do my best to review it tomorrow.

Riges · 2017-02-15T07:53:54Z

@dirkrombauts thank's for the quick reply, we waiting your returns.

dirkrombauts

Thanks for your contribution. It's looking quite good already!

One thing that's missing is support for the exclusion by tags in the GUI. Did you forget about it, or do you perhaps no experience with WPF?

dirkrombauts · 2017-02-15T12:35:29Z

src/Pickles/Pickles.MSBuild/Pickles.cs

@@ -51,6 +51,8 @@ public class Pickles : Task

        public string EnableComments { get; set; }

+        public string IgnoreTag { get; set; }


In terms of the intent of the API, I think that "ExcludeTags" is a better name for the property. Right now we support only one tag but I still want to call the property with the plural "Tags" to ensure forward compatibility.

Please rename the property to ExcludeTags (and adapt the rest of the code).

dirkrombauts · 2017-02-15T12:39:18Z

src/Pickles/Pickles.Test/WhenParsingCommandLineArguments.cs

+        [Test]
+        public void ThenCanParseIgnoreTagSuccessfully()
+        {
+            var ignoreTag = "ignore-tag";


I'm happy that you include tests on your own initiative. I'm also happy about the style.

One detail I'd like you to change: I prefer Roy Osherhove's unit testing style of making values explicit and not using parameters.

So instead of (for example) Check.That(configuration.IgnoreTag).IsEqualTo(ignoreTag) I prefer Check.That(configuration.IgnoreTag).IsEqualTo("ignore-tag").

The reason is that the second style makes the test easier to read: I instantly know what value we are talking about, and I don't need to check the value of some variable.

As you prefer, it's also ok for us

dirkrombauts · 2017-02-15T12:40:37Z

src/Pickles/Pickles/CommandLineArgumentParser.cs

@@ -40,6 +40,7 @@ public class CommandLineArgumentParser
        public const string HelpTestResultsFormat = "the format of the linked test results (nunit|nunit3|xunit|xunit2|mstest |cucumberjson|specrun|vstest)";
        public const string HelpIncludeExperimentalFeatures = "whether to include experimental features";
        public const string HelpEnableComments = "whether to enable comments in the output";
+        public const string HelpIgnoreTag = "tag used for ignore feature or scenario";


please use this text: exclude scenarios that match this tag

dirkrombauts · 2017-02-15T12:42:32Z

src/Pickles/Pickles/DirectoryCrawler/DirectoryTreeCrawler.cs

@@ -106,7 +106,8 @@ private bool CollectFiles(DirectoryInfoBase directory, INode rootNode, Tree tree
            foreach (FileInfoBase file in directory.GetFiles().Where(file => this.relevantFileDetector.IsRelevant(file)))
            {
                INode node = this.featureNodeFactory.Create(rootNode.OriginalLocation, file);
-                collectedNodes.Add(node);
+                if(node != null)


Would it be possible to create a unit test that shows the need for this check?

dirkrombauts · 2017-02-15T12:44:55Z

src/Pickles/Pickles/DirectoryCrawler/FeatureNodeFactory.cs

-                }
-
-                throw new InvalidOperationException("This feature file could not be read and will be excluded");
+                return feature != null ? new FeatureNode(file, relativePathFromRoot, feature) : null;


Why did you remove the invalidoperationexception? I know that a feature can be null if it's excluded by the tags, but malformed files will fail silently now ...

Do you prefer a default value check for preserve the InvalidOperationException ?

Yes, I think I do.

Ok, i do that. If feature is excluded i return default value

Sorry, but default value check is not the solution.
I think InvalidOperationException is useless because if we have an parsing error we already have an exception for malformed file in function Parse(string filename) of FeatureParser.cs

You're right ... let's keep your version.

dirkrombauts · 2017-02-15T12:46:39Z

src/Pickles/Pickles/FeatureParser.cs

+            if (result.Tags.Any(t => t == $"@{configuration.IgnoreTag}"))
+                return null;
+
+            var wantedFeatures = result.FeatureElements.Where(fe => fe.Tags.All(t => t != $"@{configuration.IgnoreTag}")).ToList();


This makes the tag exclusion case sensitive. Do we want that? I'm not sure ... what do you think?

We don't want or want that, we can check the tag without sensitivity.

dirkrombauts · 2017-02-15T19:38:36Z

Thanks continuing to work on this. I'm fully booked tomorrow but I set aside some time on Friday to review your changes.

Riges · 2017-02-16T07:57:54Z

Ok, for WPF I am not an expert on this technology. If you want do this part you can help me a lot.

dirkrombauts · 2017-02-16T08:04:16Z

Ok I'll do the wpf part tomorrow.

dirkrombauts

Thanks for your updates! There are a couple more things I'd like you to take a look at.

dirkrombauts · 2017-02-17T11:01:54Z

src/Pickles/Pickles.Test/BaseFixture.cs

@@ -43,9 +43,12 @@ protected IContainer Container
                if (this.container == null)
                {
                    var builder = new ContainerBuilder();
+
+                    var configuration = new Configuration() { ExcludeTags = "ignore-tag" };


I'd prefer it if you also renamed the ignore-tag in the test data to exclude-tag - here and in the other test cases

Ok, I do that

dirkrombauts · 2017-02-17T11:05:52Z

src/Pickles/Pickles/ConfigurationReporter.cs

@@ -35,6 +35,7 @@ public void ReportOn(IConfiguration configuration, Action<string> writeToLog)
            writeToLog($"Language                       : {configuration.Language}");
            writeToLog($"Incorporate Test Results?      : {(configuration.HasTestResults ? "Yes" : "No")}");
            writeToLog($"Include Experimental Features? : {(configuration.ShouldIncludeExperimentalFeatures ? "Yes" : "No")}");
+            writeToLog($"Ignore Tag                       : {configuration.ExcludeTags}");


Please also change this instance of "Ignore" to Exclude" - and make sure the :-signs in the lines are aligned with each other.

Ok, I do that

dirkrombauts · 2017-02-17T11:18:52Z

src/Pickles/Pickles/DirectoryCrawler/FeatureNodeFactory.cs

-                }
-
-                throw new InvalidOperationException("This feature file could not be read and will be excluded");
+                return feature != null ? new FeatureNode(file, relativePathFromRoot, feature) : null;


You're right ... let's keep your version.

dirkrombauts · 2017-02-17T11:20:37Z

src/Pickles/Pickles/FeatureParser.cs

+            if (result.Tags.Any(t => t.Equals($"@{configuration.ExcludeTags}", StringComparison.InvariantCultureIgnoreCase)))
+                return null;
+
+            var wantedFeatures = result.FeatureElements.Where(fe => fe.Tags.All(t => !t.Equals($"@{configuration.ExcludeTags}", StringComparison.InvariantCultureIgnoreCase))).ToList();


Could you perhaps add a test that shows that both scenarios with lowercase and mixed case versions of the exclude tag are being excluded?

We have already a test case for that, but i can do a Special test for zoom on it "feature".

We do have a test case for it? Sorry, I missed it - could you tell me where it is?

In Then_can_parse_and_ignore_scenario_with_tag_in_configuration_ignore_tag_and_keep_feature
@scenario-tag-1 @scenario-tag-2 @Ignore-Tag and @scenario-tag-1 @scenario-tag-2 @ignore-tag

But if you have missed it, it isn't enough clear and a test is needed

You're right - I prefer to have an explicit test case for this scenario.

dirkrombauts · 2017-02-17T12:52:15Z

I added the UI part.

…r no sensitivity

…kles into feature/add-ignore-tag

dirkrombauts · 2017-02-17T19:14:44Z

Thanks again for your contribution! I'll release a new version next week with your changes.

dirkrombauts · 2017-02-17T19:15:55Z

@Wil75, @Riges would you be willing to also extend the documentation with the new argument? It's in the docs repository.

Wil75 · 2017-02-19T14:25:14Z

Hi Dirk, Thanks for the new release :-) We will have a look and update the documentation this week. Best Regards, Wilfried

…

Le 17 févr. 2017 à 20:15, Dirk Rombauts ***@***.***> a écrit : @Wil75, @Riges would you be willing to also extend the documentation with the new argument? It's in the docs repository. — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.

* Feature/add ignore tag (#433) * add .vs to gitignore * add IgnoreTag Feature * add ignoreTag parameter in any Runner * Fix after test with real case * Implement requests * Fix whitespace * Add properties and handling to model and viewmodel * Insert a row and move all rows down. * Add label and textbox for exclude tags * Reorganize UI * Rename Test Explude Tag "ignore-tag" to "exclude-tag" and add test for no sensitivity * Second try of wildcard support for testresult files (#435) * Added semicolon and wildcard support for all call types (MsBuild, CommandLine, PowerShell, UI-api). Folders and no match will deliver no result file. Multiple matches on the same file will distinct into a single result. * Improved design of tests for TestResultFiles in order to reflect their intention * Changed add file into add directory to the filesystem mock. Pickles throws an exception when a folder does not exist for a resultfile. The about selecting a non existing file was a victim of this exception making it fail. By ensuring the directory exists, the testcase passes. * Release 2.14.0 (#437) * Adapt change log * Version Bump (2.14.0) * Enable creation of outputs in deploy script * Version 2.14.0

dirkrombauts · 2017-02-24T17:44:33Z

Released in version 2.14.0.

Riges · 2017-02-27T07:42:32Z

Nice, thank's

Riges added 4 commits February 14, 2017 11:29

add .vs to gitignore

53287e6

add IgnoreTag Feature

f9b6df3

add ignoreTag parameter in any Runner

674ecba

Fix after test with real case

8d1f094

dirkrombauts requested changes Feb 15, 2017

View reviewed changes

Implement requests

43fccc4

dirkrombauts requested changes Feb 17, 2017

View reviewed changes

Dirk Rombauts added 5 commits February 17, 2017 12:57

Fix whitespace

061344e

Add properties and handling to model and viewmodel

183dff4

Insert a row and move all rows down.

f804af3

Add label and textbox for exclude tags

c15dca1

Reorganize UI

fc22400

Riges and others added 2 commits February 17, 2017 14:08

Rename Test Explude Tag "ignore-tag" to "exclude-tag" and add test fo…

d1265e4

…r no sensitivity

Merge branch 'feature/add-ignore-tag' of https://github.com/Wil75/pic…

bd49c1a

…kles into feature/add-ignore-tag

dirkrombauts approved these changes Feb 17, 2017

View reviewed changes

dirkrombauts merged commit 3ab6cd6 into picklesdoc:develop Feb 17, 2017

dirkrombauts added the ready-to-be-released label Feb 17, 2017

dirkrombauts changed the title ~~Feature/add ignore tag~~ Exclude Feature or Scenario by Tag Feb 24, 2017

This was referenced Feb 24, 2017

Release 2.14.0 #437

Merged

Release 2.14.0 #438

Merged

dirkrombauts removed the ready-to-be-released label Mar 9, 2017

		@@ -51,6 +51,8 @@ public class Pickles : Task

		public string EnableComments { get; set; }

		public string IgnoreTag { get; set; }

Exclude Feature or Scenario by Tag #433

Exclude Feature or Scenario by Tag #433

Conversation

Wil75 commented Feb 14, 2017

dirkrombauts commented Feb 14, 2017

Riges commented Feb 15, 2017

dirkrombauts left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

dirkrombauts commented Feb 15, 2017

Riges commented Feb 16, 2017

dirkrombauts commented Feb 16, 2017

dirkrombauts left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

dirkrombauts commented Feb 17, 2017

dirkrombauts commented Feb 17, 2017

dirkrombauts commented Feb 17, 2017

Wil75 commented Feb 19, 2017 via email

dirkrombauts commented Feb 24, 2017

Riges commented Feb 27, 2017