fix(storybook): enable e2e tests

[mandarini]

Storybook e2e tests still had some tests and assertions that corresponded to outdated code!

• Remove two tests that do not make sense any more
• Remove react tests from Angular tests
• Re-enable tests
• Remove assertions that don't make sense any more
• Skip tests that are running or building storybook, since there are issues with Storybook v6 and pnpm, and with Node 18.

[vercel]

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

1 Ignored Deployment

Name	Status	Preview	Comments	Updated
nx-dev	⬜️ Ignored (Inspect)			Mar 17, 2023 at 3:02PM (UTC)

[nx-cloud]

☁️ Nx Cloud Report

CI is running/has finished running commands for commit 4c9d36d. As they complete they will appear below. Click to see the status, the terminal output, and the build insights.

📂 See all runs for this branch

---

✅ Successfully ran 1 target

• nx run-many -t e2e-macos --parallel=1 --exclude=e2e-detox

---

Sent with 💌 from NxCloud.

[meeroslav]

Closed my PR in favor of this one. The remaining failing test was depending on the removed should not overwrite global storybook config files to install configuration on the workspace.

Now that it's gone the second test is failing. The difference in setup to both is using buildable=true so that is somehow messing up with the storybook configuration workflow

[mandarini]

@meeroslav it's not the buildable=true. I removed it and the issue is still there.

[mandarini]

@meeroslav ok I fixed all. Pushing now

[meeroslav]

I left some notes that should be addressed.

I also think this PR diverged a bit. Let's have one PR that fixes existing tests and then have a followup that checks for storybook 7.

Mixing those two just leads to more moving parts that potentially break.

[mandarini]

@meeroslav most of the tests (building/serving) were disabled, because Storybook cannot build/serve with v6.5+Node 18 for webpack/vite. This is why I thought that it's not worth it. But yes I can disable these, and then enable them in another PR!

[meeroslav]

I think the addition to newProject should be done in a separate PR and carefully planned out. I'm afraid the current implementation would create randomly flaky tests.

[github-actions]

This pull request has already been merged/closed. If you experience issues related to these changes, please open a new issue referencing this pull request.