The input element is always hidden, so the check always ended falling
back to the label. Moreover, the label is the element that the user
interacts with, so it must be the one used.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Calviño Sánchez <danxuliu@gmail.com>
Although if the element could not be found an exception would be thrown
and the test aborted if an element is in the DOM but hidden it would be
found and the test would pass.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Calviño Sánchez <danxuliu@gmail.com>
Instead of looking for the bundle button and then checking its value now
the expected value is included in the locator and the button is checked
similarly to other elements.
No "Disable all" locator was added as it was not currently needed
anywhere.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Calviño Sánchez <danxuliu@gmail.com>
"Actor::find" is a more robust way to look for elements, as it handles
some exceptions that may be thrown. Therefore, even if the elements are
not actually used and it is only checked whether they exist or not using
the actor is the preferred way when possible (and it also makes it
consistent with the rest of the acceptance tests).
Signed-off-by: Daniel Calviño Sánchez <danxuliu@gmail.com>
Adding some missing asserts showed that the "delete user" acceptance
test was silently failing, as the deletion was not being confirmed in
the dialog and thus the user was not being deleted.
The dialog button contains a single quote ("user0's"), so the XPath
expression had to be adjusted (it seems that it is not possible to
escape a single quote in a string enclosed in single quotes in XPath
1.0).
Signed-off-by: Daniel Calviño Sánchez <danxuliu@gmail.com>
WaitFor::element... calls only perform the waiting and return whether
the condition succeeded or not, but that result needs to be explicitly
checked to prevent further steps from being executed if the wait failed.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Calviño Sánchez <danxuliu@gmail.com>
As no timeout was specified the elements were tried to be found just
once. This caused the steps to fail if the elements did not appear yet
in the page when they were tried to be found.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Calviño Sánchez <danxuliu@gmail.com>
When app app specifies php 7.4 as upper limit we have to allow the
installation on php>7.4.0. The previous version check didn't do that.
This adjusts the regexes to discard any irrelevant suffix after the
three version numbers so that we can use more fine granular checks than
php's version_compare can do out of the box, like for php 7.4 we only
compare the major and minor version numbers and ignore the patch level.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Wurst <christoph@winzerhof-wurst.at>
As "composer.lock" was not versioned the dependencies had to be resolved
everytime that the acceptance tests run, which took some precious time.
Besides that the dependency versions were also tightened for better
control.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Calviño Sánchez <danxuliu@gmail.com>
frame-ancestors doesn't fall back to default-src. So when we apply a
very restricted CSP we should make sure to set it to 'none' and not
leave it empty.
Signed-off-by: Roeland Jago Douma <roeland@famdouma.nl>
This shows in a clearer way that the expected expiration date is the
original one, but without time.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Calviño Sánchez <danxuliu@gmail.com>
This adds back what was being actually tested in the unit test fixed in
the previous commit.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Calviño Sánchez <danxuliu@gmail.com>
The expiration date was explicitly given, so it was not testing what it
should. Moreover, "link_defaultExpDays" needs to be mapped when testing
the default value (even if it will just fallback to the value of
"shareapi_expire_after_n_days").
Signed-off-by: Daniel Calviño Sánchez <danxuliu@gmail.com>
The enforced expiration date was not actually enabled, as for that
"shareapi_default_expire_date" needs to be explicitly set to "yes".
Signed-off-by: Daniel Calviño Sánchez <danxuliu@gmail.com>
The test should fail if no exception was thrown, and no exception was
thrown due to a missing configuration parameter. However, the use of
"addToAssertionCount(1)" made the test pass even if no exception was
thrown and, therefore, to silently fail.
Now the missing configuration parameter was added and the test will fail
if the expected exception is not thrown.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Calviño Sánchez <danxuliu@gmail.com>
