FQM-308/309/319: Add tests for unrecognized elements#85
Conversation
|
Just wanted to note that the maintainers of the provider-side tests are aware of change in behavior of the client simulation within these tests, and know to expect these new failures when running the provider tests against this suite. |
|
FYI @karlnaden . This PR should exhibit the change in behavior of the client-side demo as we discussed and noted in the PR description. |
karlnaden
left a comment
karlnaden
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Please include an update as a part of this PR to the documentation on running the v2.2.1 client vs server suites noting that the server suite submits known-bad requests and so to expect errors on certain tests for certain requests, which we should be able to list based on what we know of the presets and the server behavior. I know you are waiting to do most documentation updates until next week, but I think this documentation update is needed at the same time this is merged to support our review of the client suite which is happening later this week.
|
@karlnaden I updated the wiki with information about the expected failures. |
I don't see them in the repo yet - can you confirm you pushed them up? |
Sorry, I forgot that the wiki is generated from the repo contents. |
4 participants
Summary
This branch adds tests for three very similar requirements: that servers ignore unrecognized context, configuration, and CDS Hooks fields. They are each tested by taking a request which resulted in a successful Coverage Information response and repeating it after adding a field with a random key to the appropriate location.
Testing Guidance
These tests should pass when run against the client suite.
Anticipated Provider-side Test Impact
The unknown context and CDS Hooks fields both cause errors in the client side hook request logical model conformance tests when run against the server suite.