-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.1k
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 our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Only use Sizzle when required #18896
Conversation
A bunch of storage related tests fail like this:
Not specifying a html element probably does not work with
A few tests have weird issues with selecting an
|
Issues, seem to boil down to:
Basically blocked on patternfly/patternfly-react#9399 |
46d4a90
to
12b411a
Compare
Due to a PatternFly bug PCP's settings modal has two identical id's `pcp-settings-modal`. Sizzle was very liberal and selected the first id it would find, however using `document.querySelector` this fails as the result is ambiguous. Instead of replicating the wrong behaviour of allowing duplicate id's make this fail `ph_select` and work around the test until PF fixed the modal component.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for the extra effort of fixing that pcp dialog! I like this a lot -- it confirms that we at least don't use any magic selectors aside from :contains()
, and we now have the option of running without sizzle in smaller projects. Yay!
This was a test PR, this would be a step towards doing our own
:contains
implementation. First get all our projects working correctly withdocument.querySelector
and then in the future see if we can do a:contains
implementation.Just a test PR, to see if we really only need sizzle for
:contains
.Failing tests on
fedora-coreos
, blocked on patternfly/patternfly-react#9399