Protractor tests and configuration should be updated

[lordgreg]

Hi..

I was recently told to dive deeper into the whole e2e testing process. One of the big things I was told to do, or to make it work is to run the e2e tests on devices. I succeeded but with issues because of which, I think we should change some parts of configuration and generating of protractor files.

1. Before explaining the issue

Looking at protractor.conf.js, we find out the baseUrl is set to http://localhost:3000. and within the tests, switching states we are using browser.get('/#/someRoute'). Merging this two things together, we get http://localhost:3000/#/someRoute. It works.

2. Now, we want to take a huge leap into the App Testing on Device/Simulator/Emulator. There, we find out few things:

• There's no server available on port 3000,
• There's no option to user http base,
• All files are accessible using file:/// base

That being said, lets assume we first update the baseUrl, which is now: file:///android_asset/www/index.html (Android in this example). We can get the path using location.origin + location.pathname.

When now using existing calls using browser.get('/#/someRoute'), we are getting url which looks like this: file:///android_asset/www/index.html/#/someRoute, which results in network error (or simply said, file not found).

3. So, what should we do?

To make protractor tests universal, meaning independent of platform on which we are running tests, we have to change two things,

first, update protractor.conf.js baseUrl from http://localhost:3000 to http://localhost:3000/,
second, change all occurrences of browser.get() in protractor tests which start with /#/someRoute into #/someRoute.

This way, we avoid the collision of paths for different platforms. There's many other things but this one is the single one found to be working properly. This does not concern changing any other part of app, only protractor and, in case of device testing, protractor+appium.

---

I'd love to hear your comment about this @gruppjo & @MathiasTim

[gruppjo]

From my point of view, there's absolutely no reason not to do that. Small unobtrusive change. I'll get right on it unless you'd rather like to create a PR @lordgreg?

[gruppjo]

A couple of months ago I tried to have the default protractor tests run in our travis setup but didn't succeed. Maybe this is worth looking into again. Since that way we could ensure that the default protractor tests work with every build, without having to manually run them (this is what I am mostly doing right now).
More info here: travis-ci/travis-ci#272

[lordgreg]

@gruppjo I don't care :) If you have time you do it, otherwise I'll push things in next week 🙊

[gruppjo]

@lordgreg. Implementing this now.

[lordgreg]

👍

[gruppjo]

PR: protractor and karma conf update for better reporting: #489