NotificationsYou must be signed in to change notification settings
Fork2k
Star18k

Fix: react to config changes#6395

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to ourterms of service andprivacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub?Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Closed

archmoj wants to merge5 commits intomasterfromconfig-react

Closed

Fix: react to config changes#6395

archmoj wants to merge5 commits intomasterfromconfig-react

Conversation

Copy link

Contributor

archmoj commentedDec 14, 2022

Fixes#6394.

@plotly/plotly_js

react to config changes

8a0d290

archmoj added bug

something broken

status: reviewable labels

Dec 14, 2022

log for PR 6395

f889fc0

Copy link

Collaborator

alexcjohnson commentedDec 14, 2022

Nice! Maybe then just a test like this one but for cartesian?

plotly.js/test/jasmine/tests/plot_api_react_test.js

Line 439 in897fb0a

it('can put polar plots into staticPlot mode',function(done){

Copy link

ContributorAuthor

archmoj commentedDec 21, 2022•
edited
Loading

@alexcjohnson I don't recall whatnoCIdep was about.¯\_(ツ)_/¯
After the changes proposed in this PR, it looks like we need to adjust thecartesian test right above the line you mentioned.

Copy link

Collaborator

alexcjohnson commentedDec 22, 2022

@noCIdep came in here:623146f91c

    // Although not recommended, some tests "depend" on other    // tests to pass (e.g. the Plotly.react tests check that    // all available traces and transforms are tested). Tag these    // with @noCIdep, so that    // - $ npm run test-jasmine -- tags=noCI,noCIdep    // can pass.

So looks like on CI it's ignored, but it marks tests that need to run so the noCI tests succeed. Quite possibly obsolete by now, you could try running justnpm run test-jasmine -- tags=noCI and see if it works?

And good call, I somehow hadn't noticed the cartesian test right above that 😅 But that test was already passing, right? So what can we add to that test that would have broken before this change but now works correctly?