bethskurrie
2018-05-24 08:49
@tjones I want to add this to the docs. I'm not sure which section to put it in though. Thoughts?
uglyog
2018-06-02 03:47
@bethskurrie @tjones This issue was raised https://github.com/DiUS/pact-jvm/issues/691 because it is not clear that the descriptions+states need to be unique. Do we have this documented anywhere?
matt.fellows
2018-06-02 04:11
It could be documented, but it's one of those things that's probably not front page material
uglyog
2018-06-02 04:11
The issue is between tests, so I assume test B will overwrite the interaction from test A?
matt.fellows
2018-06-02 04:13
But it's a common issue, particularly for testing error scenarios. The description might be the same but trying to get an error code
bethskurrie
2018-06-02 04:58
It's not documented, but yes, if you try to make an interaction with the same provider state and description, but with a different request or response, the ruby mock raises an error telling you to change the state or desc
bethskurrie
2018-06-02 04:59
I'm not sure where we'd document it. Maybe in a list of mock service behaviours in the pact spec project?
uglyog
2018-06-02 04:59
A quick search did not turn up anything, so I think it is only documented in the code :smile:
tjones
2018-06-17 23:58
I might have misunderstood something, but it felt to me like the proposed strategies go against the guidelines in the "contract tests are not functional tests" document
bethskurrie
2018-06-18 00:09
That's why the first option is to echo the params. The second option is only when that can't be done. I thought I put something in about "this is not the way you should usually do it, but if there's no other way, then do it this way."
bethskurrie
2018-06-18 00:13
> Wouldn't it be better to use the Pact state change to stub the B controller?
Yeah... you'd then need to make sure that you had something that linked the B controller to the CClient.
bethskurrie
2018-06-18 00:14
You suggest that the pact tests could cover the C Service, but that could involved multiple calls to the C API, and other business logic that is not related to the C API.
tjones
2018-06-18 04:12
The part I'm thinking to be covered by the pact tests doesn't contain any business logic
bethskurrie
2018-06-18 04:31
To me, the controller is the part that is responsible for receiving the http requests, invoking the appropriate services calls, and rendering the responses. As little business logic as possible would be in those. I think it depends on your system where it's best to stub the service or the client out.
bethskurrie
2018-06-18 04:31
In the past, I've been working with microservices, and it was easier to just set up the right data in the database and let the entire stack execute. That wouldn't be the case in every system.
bethskurrie
2018-06-18 04:32
Which ever way you do it though, you want to have contracts that link each chain together.
tjones
2018-06-18 04:56
Right, yes. Letting the entire stack execute is what @abubics and I did at SEEK too (well, nearly. We stubbed the database)
tjones
2018-06-18 04:56
I thought this was a bit of a misuse, as the pact tests then happened to also be testing functionality
bethskurrie
2018-06-18 06:28
I don't think there's an inherent problem with pact tests executing "functionality" - just that the consumer developer should not be trying to assert functional behaviour via a contract test.
bethskurrie
2018-06-18 06:43
Perhaps we should update the documentation to clarify this distinction @tjones
tjones
2018-06-19 00:13
I don't know what channel this should go in - but since there are clear guidelines on version numbers, I wonder if we should ship helpers to set/pick up those numbers depending on the ecosystem?
bethskurrie
2018-07-04 22:12
@tjones where should "this guide" point to in the last paragraph of https://docs.pact.io/#next-steps
bethskurrie
2018-07-05 05:31
@tjones has done some awesome work on the content. And I think @matt.fellows updated the gitbook.
liran.tal
2018-07-05 05:36
I also see some new stuff like `can-i-deploy` which I don?t remember seeing last yera
bethskurrie
2018-07-05 05:48
Everyone likes readme badges! https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact_broker/wiki/Provider-verification-badges
tjones
2018-07-05 05:53
Ah, that was the "contract tests are not functional tests" document. I've fixed the link - it broke when the best practices were split into consumer/provider. I wonder if we can add a build test that looks for broken links?
tjones
2018-07-05 05:55
but there were so many "it depends" answers, that writing the document seemed really hard
tjones
2018-07-05 05:56
I reckon I linked to the not-functional-tests document by mistake. The pact nirvana doc would be a good alternative.
tjones
2018-07-05 05:57
Did we publish the pact nirvana doc yet? If not I might just remove the sentence for now
tjones
2018-07-05 06:02
It's got the right information in it, but I don't think it's a good target for that link text.
tjones
2018-07-05 06:02
But I think we should still link to it - perhaps from the best practices section?
tjones
2018-07-05 06:03
It might be another section:
Best practices:
- Consumer
- Provider
- Getting the whole team to Pact Nirvana
tjones
2018-07-06 00:47
So I just realised that the change I made yesterday was to the wrong branch (test, rather than documentation)
tjones
2018-07-06 00:47
looks like the default branch for the github repo is still test - we should probably change this?
tjones
2018-07-06 00:51
Also, @bethskurrie, I really like the change you did yesterday. It's better than mine.
tjones
2018-07-06 00:52
Finally, somehow the "introduction" page isn't shown in the table of contents on the left any more
tjones
2018-07-06 00:53
I'm not sure how this happened, but it might be to do with upgrading the gitbook version
liran.tal
2018-07-07 15:33
in `https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact_broker/wiki/Overview` the first bullet `The consumer CI build generates the pacts during test execution, and then publishes the generated pacts.` should maybe recommend that the pact should generate during a unit or integration test (and not E2E tests)
bethskurrie
2018-07-08 02:14
@liran.tal how about "* The consumer CI build generates the pacts during execution of its isolated tests, and then publishes the generated pacts."
bethskurrie
2018-07-09 02:09
@tjones any idea why the "convince me" link at the bottom of https://docs.pact.io/getting-started/what-is-pact-good-for#what-is-it-not-good-for is going to https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact.io/tree/bccfbac2288fa74f9be2225193b4a1eb18c27ec8/faq/convinceme.html ?
liran.tal
2018-08-05 18:39
```
If you use pact for your UI tests, you'll end up with an explosion of redundant interactions that will make the verification process tedious
```
ref: https://docs.pact.io/getting_started
can you explain what do you mean using pact for UI tests? do you mean here the use of a pact mock server running in an E2E setup for UI?
liran.tal
2018-08-07 19:29
so @bethskurrie does it mean you recommend that in a CI environment where an E2E test is run to have the actual backend running for the frontend?
if so, wouldn?t that somewhat conflict with evangelising CDC to the point where we say it is great to also use it not just for microservices testing but also for frontend-to-backend testing? or, that argument still holds but in a lesser strict way in terms of - the UI will still use the CDC pattern for its unit/integration test of the backend API contract but in E2E we will have a real backend running because there?s a more ?tight coupling? between a frontend and a backend?
bethskurrie
2018-08-07 22:07
> does it mean you recommend that in a CI environment where an E2E test is run to have the actual backend running for the frontend?
I would recommend using the Pact stub server using a pact generated from my unit tests.
bethskurrie
2018-08-07 22:13
I guess I wouldn't say as an absolute to *never* use pact for frontend-to-backend, but I would use it very sparingly if I did, and ensure the bulk of pact tests were unit tests (eg. handling error scenarios, different http codes, different combinations of data - you don't want to test all of those through the UI because they cover a LOT of code)
tjones
2018-09-13 07:12
So, some of the concepts on http://pact.io are assisted by code examples (which is a good thing). However, these code examples are all in Ruby. It'd be cool if we used something like this to allow people to see examples in different languages:
https://github.com/GitbookIO/plugin-codetabs
matt.fellows
2018-09-13 11:06
This looks awesome! Didn't know it existed but there's a discussion somewhere where we all agreed we wanted it
tjones
2018-09-14 00:22
Also, I've been thinking about the need for a recipes section, with common setups
tjones
2018-09-14 00:23
we could include things like "how to do provider tests with AWS API Gateway" and common questions like "what if you want to test a contract that has several requests that rely on each other"
tjones
2018-09-14 00:25
Somewhat related, I just talked to the team at nib, and they were saying they had frustrations with broken builds when they were making breaking changes in currently unreleased code
tjones
2018-09-14 00:26
I think there's a difference in ideal setups between using CI + CD, and using just CI
tjones
2018-09-14 00:27
Has there been talk of directly integrating with build systems before? Some build systems allow yellow builds, which might be a good solution for broken pacts with feature tags
tjones
2018-09-14 00:28
something like `npm run pactVerify --CI=travis` (or whatever) would potentially be useful.
tghcastro
2018-12-12 13:24
Hi all!!! .. I'm beginning to use pact (with C# and PowerShell). I already have PackBroker running and publishing pacts from consumer's tests, but I'm not finding how I can publish, on the broker, the provider's validation. (I've read the documentation). I'm consuming the API to publish pacts with PowerShell (on Jenkins).
tghcastro
2018-12-13 10:27
Thanks @matt.fellows...I don't think so ... I can publish my pacts to PactBroker. They are avail on Matrix page, but I can not update Provider version and Pact verified column.
tghcastro
2018-12-13 10:29
I think the instruction to do that is in the PactBroker docs, but I haven't found it.
bethskurrie
2018-12-13 10:55
Sorry, I'm not familiar with them, but I'm quite sure the feature exists.
tghcastro
2018-12-13 10:56
Thanks! .... My initial thinking was to discover wich API I could use to that
simon.nizov
2019-08-28 21:19
Hey!
I opened these 2 PR?s a while back:
https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact.io/pull/80
https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact.io/pull/73
Any reason they are not being merged? I?m open to criticism :slightly_smiling_face:
simon.nizov
2019-08-29 08:22
Thanks @matt.fellows! I now see that I forgot to add the new ?gotchas? page to the menu.
Fixed it in a new PR here: https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact.io/pull/95
ncritah
2019-11-19 10:30
Hi,
How can I run the documentation on my local machine?
When I use the `gitbook serve` command, I get the error below
```gitbook serve
Error loading version latest: Error: Cannot find module 'q'
Require stack:
- /Users/christine/.gitbook/versions/2.3.2/lib/index.js
- /usr/local/lib/node_modules/gitbook-cli/lib/local.js
- /usr/local/lib/node_modules/gitbook-cli/lib/index.js
- /usr/local/lib/node_modules/gitbook-cli/bin/gitbook.js
at Function.Module._resolveFilename (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:780:15)
at Function.Module._load (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:685:27)
at Module.require (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:838:19)
at require (internal/modules/cjs/helpers.js:74:18)
at Object.<anonymous> (/Users/christine/.gitbook/versions/2.3.2/lib/index.js:1:9)
at Module._compile (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:945:30)
at Object.Module._extensions..js (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:962:10)
at Module.load (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:798:32)
at Function.Module._load (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:711:12)
at Module.require (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:838:19)
TypeError: Cannot read property 'commands' of null```
matt.fellows
2019-11-19 11:11
ah, yes. The gitbook CLI is not being properly maintained I believe. They now have an in-browser editor that we use.
ncritah
2019-11-19 11:47
Yes I have. What other alternatives do I have to serve up the files local to check that the link fix I've made works as expected?
matt.fellows
2019-11-19 11:49
I?ll need to dig further, but my guess is they are retiring that over time
matt.fellows
2019-11-19 11:50
If you?re confident enough, just send the PR and we can deal with the damage - you shouldn?t have to muck around with crappy tooling to fix a link
ncritah
2019-11-19 12:48
Thanks for your quick response. Wanted to use this change as example for a session I have later this evening to introduce a couple of people to contributing to open source and thought it would be great to have a visual of the changes. It's a small change in the examples. Will just create a PR for it I guess
ncritah
2019-11-19 12:49
Realised some of the linking wasn't working yesterday when trying to use pact to create contracts on my current project and the timing was just perfect for my open source session :slightly_smiling_face:
matt.fellows
2019-11-20 04:52
oh cool, well sorry it was so annoying. Gitbook has progressed their hosted offering a lot which is great, but has left much to be desired in their OSS CLI tooling.
matt.fellows
2019-11-20 04:52
How did your OSS session go and what was the background for that - are you trying to change culture etc.?
ncritah
2019-11-20 11:44
The session went really well. And I just noticed the documentation fix we made during the session got merged https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact.io/pull/100
ncritah
2019-11-20 11:46
It was a session to introduce people from diverse backgrounds both to programming and non-programming to open source i.e. what it is and why we all should care and contribute or advocate for its usage in our different places of work
alexjjseppala
2019-11-28 19:40
Hello! Just a quick docs question. In the pact-ruby-cli docs there is a paragraph about running a mock service in a docker container saying that ports need to be exposed correctly. It also provides a link to a repository, but the link does not seem to be working.
How can I access this repository?
https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-ruby-cli#mock-service
matt.fellows
2019-11-28 21:24
The updated link should be https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-mock-service-docker, but there is a recent commit (https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-mock-service-docker/commit/69b3db1d71cb1dc4a8d75828f19b5cf09dc4a1d6) that says the CLI is the thing to use.
matt.fellows
2019-11-28 21:25
On the https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-mock-service-docker page it says to use pact-cli
matt.fellows
2019-11-28 21:26
When you head to the Pact CLI page it says to go back to the other repo (which redirected users here)
matt.fellows
2019-11-28 21:27
@bethskurrie I?m confused - is the docker mock service deprecated and is the Pact CLI docs wrong?
matt.fellows
2019-11-28 21:28
I?ve updated the link to point to the correct docker repo in the mean time
alexjjseppala
2019-11-28 21:37
> Thank you for looking into this so quickly!!! I created an issue here https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-ruby-cli/issues/8 earlier with a little more detail
matt.fellows
2019-11-28 21:43
As a side note, may I ask why you need the mock service in docker? Usually, it?s an edge case, so just want to steer you in the right direction if it?s not!
alexjjseppala
2019-11-28 22:01
Thank you! I'll try to explain it.
The consumer application that I'm testing mocks external services by spinning each of them up in docker containers. The code that I am unit testing is an NGINX plugin and it requires that all of the mocked servers are in docker containers for it to be executed unfortunately.
I'm trying to replace the provider containers with a mocked service container and to create the interactions and pact via API calls. The provider is much simpler and can use one of the SDKs - did that make sense? :sweat_smile:
bethskurrie
2019-11-28 22:55
Ok, so this does work `docker run --rm -p 1234:1234 pactfoundation/pact-cli:latest mock-service -p 1234 --host 0.0.0.0`
bethskurrie
2019-11-28 22:55
But, the docker container doesn't stop when I send it a `ctrl + c` and I can't work out why
bethskurrie
2019-11-28 23:00
`Note: ENTRYPOINT and CMD in the shell form run as a subcommand of /bin/sh -c, which does not pass signals. This means that the executable is not the container's PID 1 and does not receive Unix signals.`
alexjjseppala
2019-11-28 23:01
Oops actually I was using the mock service docker container when I was getting that issue. I believe I got the issue on the pact-cli container earlier today as well
bethskurrie
2019-11-28 23:02
tbh, I haven't used either of them on a project before, so this might just have been the existing behaviour since it was created
bethskurrie
2019-11-28 23:04
ah, if you run it with `-it` your ctl+c works because your terminal session is hooked up to it.
bethskurrie
2019-11-28 23:05
looks like there's a lot of noise on the nets about ctl+c not working as expected in various places.
matt.fellows
2019-11-29 01:59
Yes, you?ll need a tty to be able to interact with the (any) container. `docker run -it --rm -p 1234:1234 pactfoundation/pact-cli:latest mock-service -p 1234 --host 0.0.0.0` works :ok_hand: for me
alexjjseppala
2019-11-29 15:41
The new command worked for me! Thank you for the help @bethskurrie @matt.fellows
pact501
2020-02-23 21:44
I thought I saw a `WIP versioning blog post` somewhere.
It seems to be gone.
Was I just imagining things, or was it taken down, @bethskurrie?
bethskurrie
2020-02-23 21:44
It's never been publicly released because the feature is not publicly released yet.
bethskurrie
2020-02-23 21:45
We need to get at least a second pact implementation (pact-jvm) using it before we release it publicly.
matt.fellows
2020-02-23 21:50
FYI It's probably a few weeks away from JS and is currently in Go beta (getting customer feedback)
tjones
2020-03-03 00:43
A discussion at work highlighted that we don?t have a doco page on where to do what part of the pact workflow. I think we should make one - what do we think of recommending that:
* pact test / verify: part of the test job
* publish contracts: post-test
* can-i-deploy: part of the deploy or predeploy job
bethskurrie
2020-03-05 21:55
Also, here is a description of the CI jobs - it's just not in a place that's logical to find https://docs.pact.io/pact_broker/advanced_topics/webhooks#consumer-ci
bethskurrie
2020-03-05 22:14
I think we need it in two places - it should be covered in the Pact Nirvana document, so that as you go, you know where to put things, but then we also need a "this is the big picture, all in one" kind of thing.
bethskurrie
2020-03-05 22:15
This might be a good place for the "all in one" view https://docs.pact.io/pact_broker/set_up_checklist
bethskurrie
2020-03-11 22:46
It's really part of "how does contract testing fit into the overall testing approach?"
rikeshgohil
2020-05-13 11:00
hello. I am looking to workout where we have contract tests in our code base - is there some way to auto generate this to show in some sort of document?
rikeshgohil
2020-05-13 11:08
I just want to know where we have contract tests within our code base. I can manually find and work with developers - but was thinking if something can be auto generated for example like swagger for apis. I'm not sure if this is possible - also I am new to pact
bethskurrie
2020-05-13 11:10
Can you not look at the UI of the Pact Broker to see what pacts there are?
matt.fellows
2020-05-13 11:10
Is the idea you want to be able to generate a coverage map of services you have versus contracts you have?
rikeshgohil
2020-05-13 11:12
thanks @bethskurrie I can have a look at the broker for whats in place. awesome :slightly_smiling_face:
rikeshgohil
2020-05-13 11:12
yes @matt.fellows on your point
"Is the idea you want to be able to generate a coverage map of services you have versus contracts you have?"
Is this possible
bethskurrie
2020-05-13 11:13
If you click on the name of the application, it will show you a diagram of all the applications that that have contracts with the one you selected.
matt.fellows
2020-05-13 11:13
you?d need to generate a map of your own ecosystem, and then contrast that map with what Pact has
matt.fellows
2020-05-13 11:14
We?d like to add that to Pactflow, because it would involve a few other moving parts
matt.fellows
2020-05-13 11:16
yep, and you might also like to try exporting them ala https://pactflow.io/blog/diagrams-with-graphviz/
sankalan13
2020-05-22 08:00
Was looking at pact-go in github where I clicked on this https://dius.com.au/2016/02/03/microservices-pact/ and it gave me a 403 Forbidden (access denied). The defect is in the Readme.md file for https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-go. In the introduction section where the Getting Started with Pact for Begineers is hyperlinked. We should change it to the new website.
phil.endsley
2020-06-18 02:27
I have a couple items of feedback:
In the pact-jvm docs for Pending Pacts
> You also need to provide the tags used to publish the providers main-line results (i.e. tags like prod or master).
https://github.com/DiUS/pact-jvm/tree/master/provider/junit5#pending-pact-support-version-410-and-later
This seems a little misleading to me the way it's worded. Yes, you should use this for your "main build", but really, this should be whatever branch you're currently running, right?
Also, I think there's a broken link on the CI/CD Workshop
https://docs.pactflow.io/docs/workshops/ci-cd/
The GOALS button takes you to
https://docs.pactflow.io/docs/workshops/ci-cd/set-up-ci/index (Which I'm assuming doesn't exist, so it falls back to http://docs.pactflow.io)
I think instead, it's supposed to be:
https://docs.pactflow.io/docs/workshops/ci-cd/set-up-ci/
uglyog
2020-06-18 02:32
Thanks for the feedback. Can you raise Github issues for these so they don't get lost
ayyamuthutechnical
2020-06-25 17:55
Hi guys, Do we have any good documentation for pact-python as like pact-js or pact-java. Thanks
bethskurrie
2020-06-25 22:59
The principles are the same across languages however. Please read the Guides section on the http://docs.pact.io site https://docs.pact.io/consumer/
bethskurrie
2020-06-26 04:26
Hi peeps who are interested in documentation. You may have noticed that there has been some movement on the docs front. I've been adding some Github Actions to sync the documentation from each of the repositories into http://docs.pact.io. This will make it much easier for people to find, especially as it will now be indexed and searchable by Algolia (a search engine which provides free services for OSS projects, bless them!).
bethskurrie
2020-06-26 04:30
We're also going to start writing docs that describe the behaviour of each feature once, and providing code examples for each of the languages, rather than having each of the languages write their own docs for each of the features. We hope this will provide better quality information to Pact users, and reduce duplication of effort and divergence. To this end, I'm going to be automatedly raising issues in each of the repositories with a request to provide code examples for each feature. If you see one of them, and want to contribute, please do! They're not just for the project maintainers. They'd be a great way for new contributors to get involved.
bethskurrie
2020-06-26 05:44
I've added some docs on how to update the docs here :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: cc: @tjones https://github.com/pact-foundation/docs.pact.io#pact-docs-website
uglyog
2020-06-26 05:45
Very meta of you. And good too, because I need to add the Pact-Rust to the docs
matt.fellows
2020-06-26 08:14
From a current customer - I responded that we should probably look to document contract testing for hypermedia APIs such as Siren, HAL
bethskurrie
2020-06-26 08:19
I put a place holder url in the pact, and then swap it out for the real one when I do my verifications using rack middleware
bethskurrie
2020-06-26 08:20
I've wanted to support it properly since we first used pact and HAL at REA, but body except me seemed bothered about it.
matt.fellows
2020-06-26 08:34
There?s like a ?meta? Pact that needs to be created to support this well.
matt.fellows
2020-06-26 08:35
BUT, it?s still possible to break linkages with hypermedia - if you rename a link (or remove one) then boom
matt.fellows
2020-06-26 08:37
If you truly follow the hypermedia to ?level 3 REST?, it?s beautiful but not terribly pragmatic. Like Haskell
bethskurrie
2020-06-26 08:37
But unfortunately i can't stop people using hard coded urls, so I'm still constrained on my ability to reactor anything
uglyog
2020-06-27 01:19
I support it with regex matchers: https://github.com/DiUS/pact-jvm/blob/master/pact-publish/src/test/groovy/broker/PactBrokerClientPactSpec.groovy#L264
uglyog
2020-06-27 04:57
@bethskurrie the GHTOKENFORTRIGGERINGPACTDOCSUPDATE secret, is that a personal token of yours?
sairsule
2020-07-21 17:08
https://docs.pact.io/faq/convinceme#docsNav
On the graphs for Contract tests VS E2E tests, the axis for graphs are wrong. Time and efforts are labelled wrong.
bethskurrie
2020-07-26 22:19
I've raised an issue to fix that https://github.com/pact-foundation/docs.pact.io/issues/18
sairsule
2020-07-28 08:53
funnier thing is I used this in one of PPT( I am selling Pact in my company :slightly_smiling_face: ), presented it in-front of a few Architects, everybody liked it. we even discussed on cost and efforts about e2e tests. This was one major point why everybody liked Pact. Still nobody seemed to notice the mistake.
This definitely is another example of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Typoglycemia
bethskurrie
2020-07-31 05:45
Thank goodness people see what they expect to see, not what's actually there.
lucasmat.7
2020-08-13 07:41
Hi... I'm sorry to ask such a newbie question here, but I couldn't find it elsewhere - is there a way to check pact-broker version through the UI ?
matt.fellows
2020-08-13 07:47
Head to the API browser and in the top right hand corner, you?ll see an `x-pact-broker-version` header (or something like that)
heytaco
2020-08-25 03:57
Hi there! My name is HeyTaco!, and you can use me to give people tacos to show your appreciation. My tacos will spread joy through Slack!
phil.endsley
2020-08-25 15:51
@bethskurrie I finally got around to putting together some suggestions for Pending/WIP pacts
https://github.com/pact-foundation/docs.pact.io/issues/26
kflo
2020-09-22 01:39
hey! i?ve been eyeing pact for awhile and as our company is starting to split our monolith into distributed services i?m looking at it again in more detail. the HTTP API use cases for pact make perfect sense to me and i think the documentation for those use cases are great. i?m having a bit of a harder time understanding how pact works for messaging. for automated testing, i think it?s pretty clear, as like for HTTP API use cases it generates a pact file on the consumer, and then verifies it on the producer. but for example if we want to stand up our service and do some testing against it (local or otherwise), what is the service publishing to and consuming from (the message equivalent of the pact broker stub APIs, for instance).
matt.fellows
2020-09-22 01:41
https://dius.com.au/2017/09/22/contract-testing-serverless-and-asynchronous-applications/ does explain it a little bit
kflo
2020-09-22 01:41
yes i guess this is more abstract than being able to read unit test code :slightly_smiling_face:
matt.fellows
2020-09-22 01:42
with messages, we skip the actual protocol interaction - so there is not actual talking to/reading from the queue going on in the pact test. We talk directly to the functions that _produce_ or _consume_ the message, and check that they either produce what was expected, or can actually consumer (without erroring, essentially) that message
kflo
2020-09-22 01:43
we are using scala, but i?m not yet interested in the implementation details but more so the high level detail of all the pieces involved for now
matt.fellows
2020-09-22 01:45
there is no running services in message pacts - it is pretty much a unit test of a function on either side of the interaction
kflo
2020-09-22 01:46
hm, but it seems like it would be beneficial to have a stub service that can response to messages and/or emit messages
kflo
2020-09-22 01:47
for example, how would you do any type of exploratory testing on a service which only uses messages? no HTTP API?
matt.fellows
2020-09-22 01:47
maybe I?m missing the point, but pact is really for automating the contract testing bit
kflo
2020-09-22 01:48
it is, yes, but they also offer the HTTP stub APIs which is a big benefit for us
kflo
2020-09-22 01:48
basically stand-in APIs for your contracts, so you don?t have to stand up the real APIs
bethskurrie
2020-09-22 01:49
HTTP stubs are easy to make generically (everything speaks HTTP the same way) so it was an easy win to make them. Messaging queues are all different.
bethskurrie
2020-09-22 01:50
Creating a real stub messaging queue for every type of queue would be a lot of work for us, and we already have too much work to do on existing features related to actual contract testing.
bethskurrie
2020-09-22 01:50
If you're keen to be involved, or know someone who is, we always welcome more maintainers!
kflo
2020-09-22 01:50
so what i?m hearing is what i was looking for does not exist yet, but sounds like something that might be useful
kflo
2020-09-22 01:51
definitely interested in getting involved? if i can find the free time, or if i can do it on company time :wink:
bethskurrie
2020-09-22 01:51
There are probably already existing stub message queues. The quick win might actually be just wring up the pact contract format so you can easily load them into an existing stub.
matt.fellows
2020-09-22 01:55
The verifier we use sort of does emit a message, but it?s wrapped in other pact stuff (e.g. the metadata, description of the message itself, states etc.)
matt.fellows
2020-09-22 01:55
> Creating a real stub messaging queue for every type of queue would be a lot of work for us, and we already have too much work to do on existing features related to actual contract testing.
The reverse i suppose is that because we are ?queue agnostic?, you can do this sort of testing for a variety of other use cases - such as dropping a JSON file in an S3 bucket/file system, for example
kflo
2020-09-22 01:57
yeah, even though we use kafka that is sort of an implementation detail, i would be happy with a more generic stub solution
kflo
2020-09-22 01:59
really it would just be a mechanism that could, for example, emit a message based on some message it consumes combined with provider state. or it could emit a message if you ask it to based on some provider state
bethskurrie
2020-09-22 02:00
We don't (yet) have async message request/response contracts, but I think it's under discussion.
nazar.khmil
2020-10-05 13:41
Hey!
I'm trying to understand how pact works with async messaging
There is a producer example in the docs
But what do you do with a consumer, how is the contract (json) file generated?
bethskurrie
2020-10-07 00:12
@nazar.khmil it's a little bit different because there's no request/response cycle. You're just saying "here's the message that I expect" and then you write a test to show that your code correctly handles the message you expect.
bethskurrie
2020-10-07 00:14
Here's a blog post on it https://www.dius.com.au/2017/09/22/contract-testing-serverless-and-asynchronous-applications/
guppy0356.nakira
2020-10-23 02:28
In the instructions in workshop doc, `Repeat the above instructions to configure the Pactflow account for your provider project.` I can't do this because `make travis_encrypt_pact_broker_token` is removed at cd3f5772c6fa30f32c72fc19f2f6e4b24b7374e8. Why?
tjones
2020-10-23 05:48
Could you link us to this part of the documentation? Sounds like we need to edit something
bethskurrie
2020-10-23 09:26
Or, here are the instructions https://docs.travis-ci.com/user/encryption-keys/#usage
adam_figgins
2020-10-28 14:35
Hi. Just working on our pactflow ci / cd implementation. Thought I would add a template for the webhook to trigger github builds while I was there. I've created a PR :slightly_smiling_face:
adam_figgins
2020-11-05 08:07
Hi. I'm working on an internal department presentation for our pactflow PoC and noticed the new pact-workshop-advanced powerpoint deck on the docs. I was wondering if I could use a few of the slides from the deck to illustrate the features of the workflow (the diagrams explain things in a far more succinct way than I ever could!). I would provide proper credit to author@bethskurrie of course.
matt.fellows
2020-11-05 08:54
By the way, any feedback on the material would be _super_ useful for us. We know we have work to do, but hopefully this is a good start!
adam_figgins
2020-11-05 10:45
Sure thing. The only thing I can think of so far is to add additional steps in the CI/CD workshop for the GitHub bits, but I imagine that's already in the pipeline for you guys.
adam_figgins
2020-11-05 11:24
Cool. Otherwise it's a great workshop. Wiring up the steps in our own pipeline was relatively straightforward following the guide. It's only our own cluster setup that is causing it to take a long time to get our contract testing PoC implemented :stuck_out_tongue: I did find the http://pact.net documentation lacks a bit in terms of being more specific for setting up advanced features like WIP / pending pacts, and how to do consumer driven verification as a result of a webhook trigger (i.e. Specifying a pact URL rather than a pact broker object for verification). It didn't take too long to translate the examples in the workshop to .net however.
mateusz.derks
2020-11-17 06:48
Hey, I found a few dead links on the docs website. A few straightforward case are fixed https://github.com/pact-foundation/docs.pact.io/pull/52 but I?m not quite sure how to approach _Provider verification results page_ in https://github.com/pact-foundation/docs.pact.io/pull/53 . Any advice about it?s proper place?
matt.fellows
2020-11-17 06:49
surprised it was allowed to deploy - docusaurus two builds fail if the links are broken. Maybe we disabled it ?
mateusz.derks
2020-11-17 06:52
The links were correct locally, but are transformed into invalid address when resolved to full http? URL
mateusz.derks
2020-11-17 06:54
Oh, thats only about the first PR. When I was testing it the build process reported the second broken URL.
tjones
2020-11-17 06:54
@mateusz.derks: I've merged the first one. Your changes looked right to me - was there somewhere else you thought the link should go?
mateusz.derks
2020-11-17 06:56
@tjones I had doubts about position of this page in the sidebar. The source file was located in advanced topics folder but it was rendered outside of Advanced Topics section of the sidebar. That was was only doubt if the link should be moved or the source file.
tjones
2020-11-17 06:58
I think provider verification results is more a normal topic than an advanced topic. Sometimes we don't move files so that old deeplinks into the docs don't break, though I thought @bethskurrie found a way around that. Beth, do you have any extra context for the position of the Provider Verification Results page?
mikahchapman
2020-11-18 22:26
I don't remember if I saw a bit of documentation on this or it was posted somewhere else, but is there any documentation about how to handle a binary response body? Last I remember seeing was that you can't describe/verify the body, but you can work with the rest of the interaction.
uglyog
2020-11-18 22:36
It depends on which language implementation. Anything based on the Ruby one does not support it, but Pact-JVM, Pact-C++ and the beta versions of Pact-JS V3 does. There is no documentation for it (yet)
wainstead
2020-12-01 15:06
I'm working through the tutorial, and at steps like https://docs.pact.io/5-minute-getting-started-guide/#run-the-consumer-tests I am getting an error from https://docspactio-getting-started--mefellows.repl.co/ which looks like this:
matt.fellows
2020-12-01 20:39
Also you may have seen this: https://docs.pact.io/faq/#how-do-i-test-binary-files-in-responses-such-as-a-download
william.pritchard
2021-01-13 09:40
Hi, I'm trying to view the template parameters link (from the webhooks documentation page https://docs.pact.io/pact_broker/webhooks) but its linking me to a page not found https://docs.pact.io/pact_broker/pact_broker/advanced_topics/api_docs/webhooks#dynamic-variable-substitution
Does anyone have the correct link?
matt.fellows
2021-01-13 10:17
https://docs.pact.io/pact_broker/advanced_topics/api_docs/webhooks/#dynamic-variable-substitution (looks like `pact_broker` part is duped)
matt.fellows
2021-01-13 10:20
The REPL thing has been a little frustrating since we set it up. The errors aren?t actually a problem, and I can?t make those browsers disappear (they are not needed, but any time a port spawns it thinks it should open a browser)
matt.fellows
2021-01-13 10:20
I?ve created a few katacoda ones here: https://docs.pactflow.io/docs/tutorials/
dshattuck
2021-01-14 16:02
I love having these Pact channels!
There's a broken link on the https://docs.pact.io/consumer/ page -- note that the term 'consumer' is duplicated in the following, resulting in a broken link: "You can read more about the difference between contract and functional tests https://docs.pact.io/consumer/consumer/contract_tests_not_functional_tests."
Instead of https://docs.pact.io/consumer/consumer/contract_tests_not_functional_tests it should be https://docs.pact.io/consumer/contract_tests_not_functional_tests
william.pritchard
2021-01-15 11:11
Looks like the link on the webhooks page is broken again, linking to https://docs.pact.io/pact_broker/webhooks/advanced_topics/api_docs/webhooks#dynamic-variable-substitution
ben.kirberger
2021-02-25 18:34
Looks like there is a broken link here, as well: https://docs.pact.io/faq/#what-is-pact-not-good-for
Under:
> Can I test GraphQL?https://docs.pact.io/faq/#can-i-test-graphql
> Yes.
> See below, or the https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-js/tree/feat/message-pact/examples/graphql.
^ This link.
ben.kirberger
2021-02-25 18:37
Assuming this might be the intended URL: https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-workshop-js. ?
ben.kirberger
2021-02-25 18:39
Errrr, THIS rather: https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-js/tree/master/examples/graphql
mikewagner21
2021-03-01 18:47
Hi @ben.kirberger, not sure if your into videos but here is video explaining how to use PACT with GraphQL using GraphQLInteraction() (spoiler: Skip to 1:05 in the video to get to the code examples)
https://youtu.be/jXH9dBglVsc
ben.kirberger
2021-03-01 19:03
Ah, thanks for that @mikewagner21 ? I checked this out and while it looks helpful for testing basic GraphQL, I am still missing the piece on how to contract test on top of Apollo federation. Our various microservices are each federating via apollo, so sometimes there is a good deal of schema stitching as I understand it. In this respect, I see our world having many consumers + many producers, and I?m not sure how to define a discrete integration. Ex. Service A ?consumes? the federated /graphql endpoint, say POSTing a simple mutation. Service B ?provides? for this simple mutation, but requires federated fields coming from Services C and D. Who is the provider here? How can we build a 1:1 consumer<>provider pact here? That?s what I think I?m having trouble with?
ben.kirberger
2021-03-01 19:05
:point_up: Not sure if these details bring anything else to mind for @matt.fellows or @bethskurrie? Right now I?ve dropped trying pact w/ GQL and am investigating pact w/ Kafka instead.
isa.levine
2021-03-02 19:00
I've got my eye on this too -- I'm in a similar boat, and while I can get a consumer test passing with a GraphQL query, the Apollo federated gateway is complicating how to do the provider verifications.
akos.csurai
2021-03-10 14:10
Hello,
I have found a broken link here:
https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-jvm/tree/v4.1.x/consumer/junit#matching-any-key-in-a-map
https://github.com/DiUS/pact-jvm/blob/master/consumer/junit/src/test/java/au/com/dius/pact/consumer/junit/WildcardKeysTest.java. 's link is broken
https://github.com/DiUS/pact-jvm/blob/master/consumer/junit/src/test/java/au/com/dius/pact/consumer/junit/WildcardKeysTest.java
instead
https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-jvm/blob/v4.x/consumer/pact-jvm-consumer-junit/src/test/java/au/com/dius/pact/consumer/WildcardKeysTest.java
or
https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-jvm/blob/4_0_10/consumer/pact-jvm-consumer-junit/src/test/java/au/com/dius/pact/consumer/WildcardKeysTest.java
matt.fellows
2021-03-10 20:49
Thanks Akos - @uglyog could you please update to the one that is most correct?
raghavendra.kalakonda
2021-03-11 23:20
Hello Everyone,
Has anyone used Pact with Azure event hub please?
akos.csurai
2021-03-12 10:09
Hello Team,
I am new to this area and I had a hard time set up my java8 gradle 6.8.x junit pact v4.1.x or v4.0.x environment.
You know it is hard to judge what the situation would have been if the documentation was different, but
I suggest some minor changes:
https://docs.pact.io/implementation_guides/jvm/consumer/junit5
Add chapter "JUnit5 Configuration" after "Dependency" chapter
refer to https://docs.gradle.org/current/dsl/org.gradle.api.tasks.testing.Test.html
test {
useJUnitPlatform()
}
https://docs.pact.io/implementation_guides/jvm/consumer/junit
Add chapter "JUnit Configuration" after "Dependency" chapter
test {
useJUnit()
}
https://docs.pact.io/implementation_guides/jvm/provider/gradle
Add chapter "Configure Test Framework"
Repeat here the same as above or just refer them.
I may also move up Gradle chapter under Pact JVM
Finally, some reasoning: My understanding probably was wrong because
I did not know anything about useJUnitPlatform, or how it makes any difference.
I only that I do not need JUnit5 in the beginning, since most of the examples do not use it either.
So, I set JUnitPlatform and my junit implementation said:
"No tests found for given includes "
bethskurrie
2021-03-12 10:10
Hi @akos.csurai I'm not a java dev but I understand the setup can be quite tricky.
bethskurrie
2021-03-12 10:11
Given it's fresh in your mind, we'd love to have any of your suggested improvements. You just need to click on the "edit this page" button at the bottom of the doc page.
akos.csurai
2021-03-12 10:55
Hi @bethskurrie
I have proposed the changes.
As a comment for the change, I linked this conversation.
dabfleming
2021-03-16 02:47
FYI Just noticed a broken link on https://docs.pact.io/pact_broker/webhooks/
phelantomas
2021-04-01 13:38
Hey, this link is not working https://docs.pact.io/pact_nirvana/provider/recommended_configuration#verification-triggered-by-provider-change :slightly_smiling_face:
victoria.kruczek
2021-04-08 15:40
hello pact community! :slightly_smiling_face:
I?ve come with a more of a philosophical question to you which I was hit with during presenting Pact to my company (and couldn?t find answer to afterward in the docs). The question was:
```In general shouldn't it be the other way around? As the mobile app is the consumer of the api, not the api should test if it fits a contract. IMHO the api defines the contract and the consumer (mobile app) should check if it meets the contract.```
I answered that:
```The responsibility falls to the provider to say to the correct team, that changes made in the backend will impact the consumer application, and changes are required to be implemented to handle those properly. Either this scenario will be in place, or one will be responsible to implement changes in a way that doesn't break the consumer```
I feel a bit unsettled with this answer, though. Is there any more reasoning why Pact is created this particular way?
johnnycareer
2021-04-08 18:57
AFAICT, the main argument is that your API is only valuable because, and to the extent that, consumers value it.
The way to proceed then is to provide the union of your known consumer needs, and only that (lest you slide down the slippery slope of scope creep together with its associated dysfunctions). IMO, this is a technique that manifests the philosophy of Specification by Example (SBE).
yousafn
2021-04-08 21:25
yo dudes/dudettes, in the pact-workshop-js guide, it mentions an npx package called `pact-broker` which doesn?t exist
https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-workshop-js#can-i-deploy
Should it point to the docker image of the ruby cli here?
https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-ruby-cli#can-i-deploy
yousafn
2021-04-08 21:54
Two ways we can run it via docker from the CLI :slightly_smiling_face:
Attached to our host network
```docker run --rm \
--network='host' \
pactfoundation/pact-cli:latest \
broker can-i-deploy \
--pacticipant FrontendWebsite \
--broker-base-url http://localhost:8000 \
--broker-username pact_workshop \
--broker-password pact_workshop \
--latest```
Attached to our the default network started by the docker-compose setup
```docker run --rm \
--network='pact-workshop-js_default' \
pactfoundation/pact-cli:latest \
broker can-i-deploy \
--pacticipant FrontendWebsite \
--broker-base-url http://broker_app:80 \
--broker-username pact_workshop \
--broker-password pact_workshop \
--latest```
yousafn
2021-04-08 21:58
Raised an issue https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-workshop-js/issues/24 on the examples. Running this session tomorrow, should be fun!
tjones
2021-04-09 03:32
This is a much more convenient way of running the binaries vs docker- I wouldn?t want to see it replaced
tjones
2021-04-09 03:36
If you want to run it without installing first, you can `npx -p @pact-foundation/pact-node pact-broker` I believe
tjones
2021-04-09 04:26
Yes, that's right. The API exists to serve the client, not the other way around.
yousafn
2021-04-09 09:01
Yeah no dice for me :disappointed:
```? pact-workshop-js git:(master) find . -name pact-broker
./provider/node_modules/.bin/pact-broker
./provider/node_modules/@pact-foundation/pact-node/standalone/darwin-1.86.0/pact/bin/pact-broker
./provider/node_modules/@pact-foundation/pact-node/standalone/darwin-1.86.0/pact/lib/vendor/ruby/2.2.0/bin/pact-broker
./provider/node_modules/@pact-foundation/pact-node/standalone/darwin-1.86.0/pact/lib/vendor/ruby/2.2.0/gems/pact_broker-client-1.27.0/bin/pact-broker
./consumer/node_modules/.bin/pact-broker
./consumer/node_modules/@pact-foundation/pact-node/standalone/darwin-1.86.0/pact/bin/pact-broker
./consumer/node_modules/@pact-foundation/pact-node/standalone/darwin-1.86.0/pact/lib/vendor/ruby/2.2.0/bin/pact-broker
./consumer/node_modules/@pact-foundation/pact-node/standalone/darwin-1.86.0/pact/lib/vendor/ruby/2.2.0/gems/pact_broker-client-1.27.0/bin/pact-broker
? pact-workshop-js git:(master) npx pact-broker
npm ERR! code E404
npm ERR! 404 Not Found - GET https://registry.npmjs.org/pact-broker - Not found
npm ERR! 404
npm ERR! 404 'pact-broker@latest' is not in the npm registry.
npm ERR! 404 You should bug the author to publish it (or use the name yourself!)
npm ERR! 404
npm ERR! 404 Note that you can also install from a
npm ERR! 404 tarball, folder, http url, or git url.
npm ERR! A complete log of this run can be found in:
npm ERR! /Users/you54f/.npm/_logs/2021-04-09T09_00_55_124Z-debug.log
Install for [ 'pact-broker@latest' ] failed with code 1```
yousafn
2021-04-09 09:02
@tjones solution worked for me though
```? pact-workshop-js git:(master) npx -p @pact-foundation/pact-node pact-broker
Commands:
pact-broker can-i-deploy -a, --pacticipant=PACTICIPANT -b, --broker-base-url=BROKER_BASE_URL #
pact-broker create-or-update-pacticipant --name=NAME -b, --broker-base-url=BROKER_BASE_URL # Create or update pacticipant by name
pact-broker create-or-update-webhook URL --uuid=UUID -X, --request=METHOD -b, --broker-base-url=BROKER_BASE_URL # Creates or updates a webhook with a provided uui...
pact-broker create-version-tag -a, --pacticipant=PACTICIPANT -b, --broker-base-url=BROKER_BASE_URL -e, --version=VERSION # Add a tag to a pacticipant version
pact-broker create-webhook URL -X, --request=METHOD -b, --broker-base-url=BROKER_BASE_URL # Creates a webhook using the same switches as a c...
pact-broker describe-version -a, --pacticipant=PACTICIPANT -b, --broker-base-url=BROKER_BASE_URL # Describes a pacticipant version. If no version o...
pact-broker generate-uuid # Generate a UUID for use when calling create-or-u...
pact-broker help [COMMAND] # Describe available commands or one specific command
pact-broker list-latest-pact-versions -b, --broker-base-url=BROKER_BASE_URL # List the latest pact for each integration
pact-broker publish PACT_DIRS_OR_FILES ... -a, --consumer-app-version=CONSUMER_APP_VERSION -b, --broker-base-url=BROKER_BASE_URL # Publish pacts to a Pact Broker.
pact-broker test-webhook --uuid=UUID -b, --broker-base-url=BROKER_BASE_URL # Test the execution of a webhook
pact-broker version ```
matt.fellows
2021-04-09 09:02
Strange! I'll have a look after kids bed routine. Maybe it's the version of node/npm/npx
matt.fellows
2021-04-09 09:03
Ah, maybe they need explicit package scoping to avoid arbitrary code execution :rolling_on_the_floor_laughing:
tjones
2021-04-09 09:04
I think of it as "execute this in the local project, or download and execute it if the project doesn't have it"
tjones
2021-04-09 09:05
the second step is failing because you need to say what package the binary is in if you aren't in a project
yousafn
2021-04-09 09:05
this works `? pact-workshop-js git:(master) cd consumer && npx pact-broker` but the guide shows running everything from outside the provider/consumer folder
tjones
2021-04-09 09:06
> the guide shows running everything from outside the provider/consumer folder
Does it? The other commands look like they should be run in the projects
yousafn
2021-04-09 09:07
you run this from the top folder
```npm run test:pact --prefix provider```
or
```npm run test:pact --prefix consumer```
to either do the pact, test, or start either the consumer or provider seperately, or concurrently
yousafn
2021-04-09 11:54
Looks like it doesn?t
https://github.com/npm/npx/issues/74
plus its also archived :exploding_head:
but yeah thanks gents, that solved it for me, workshop went splendidly
yousafn
2021-04-14 09:34
really good @matt.fellows think we had bout 18 at the start. Will try and get a copy of the video for you
yousafn
2021-04-14 12:38
we could probably add a step12 to publish the pacts to the hosted pactflow ui, either with the temp creds / example broker or creating their own (would show use of the `pactBrokerToken` option over username/pass - will probably add a PR at some point
mail_4brad
2021-04-15 02:41
I?m new to pact and noted the https://docs.pact.io/5-minute-getting-started-guide#run-the-consumer-tests repl is offline?
> We Couldn?t Reach Your Repl
matt.fellows
2021-04-15 03:04
For some reason, it tries to open a web browser even though we don?t want it
matt.fellows
2021-04-15 03:05
(I think any time a port is opened, it tries to go and look at it - which makes no sense when testing an API)
matt.fellows
2021-04-15 03:05
If you want a better one, this katacoda would be my recommendation: https://katacoda.com/pact/scenarios/pactflow-getting-started-js
matt.fellows
2021-04-15 03:06
I wish it could be easily embedded into the OSS docs, because we could then remove the REPL. Keen for your feedback and what was more useful
mail_4brad
2021-04-15 10:14
@matt.fellows The Katacoda is great. Code feels much more integrated with the documentation
matt.fellows
2021-04-15 10:33
I don't like the idea of sending people away from the site to katacoda, but if the content is more useful it's probably worth it
mail_4brad
2021-04-15 11:36
Yeah and people use the product when they understand it, not because they?re stuck on the site. For me, the more resources across the more sites, the better. Just my bias.
matt.fellows
2021-04-15 11:37
Have you watched any of the videos? We're seeing good take up, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's understood/helpful
matt.fellows
2021-04-15 11:38
We'd love to know if it actually helps and if we should make more, or other mediums (docs, articles, code samples) are more useful
mail_4brad
2021-04-15 11:43
That?s the first thing I saw. Was reading this https://www.cigniti.com/blog/microservices-testing-quality-gates-model/, first intro to pact, googled ?pact teesting?, went to this https://docs.pact.io/, good amount of writing above the video, video was gold. Immediately shared link with colleague.
matt.fellows
2021-04-15 11:47
I think I'm going to pull the trigger on fixing the 5 minute guide. Need to get across the other maintainers but this helps make that case
mail_4brad
2021-04-15 11:51
For future videos, suggest you disable ide hover popups and blames as they?re distracting. Otherwise they were great.
bethskurrie
2021-04-26 22:58
I have a documentation improvement task for anyone who is interested in contributing. Our webhooks template library page would be better if it had a matching create-webhook CLI example for every JSON example. I've done the first one here https://docs.pact.io/pact_broker/webhooks/template_library/#cli Is there someone who would be interested in converting/testing/adding the docs for each example? @bheemreddy181? I know you're quite experienced in this area.
daniel.kalleward
2021-04-27 11:12
Hello! Newbie here. I'm so impressed with the pages of docs + examples you have for each of the endless number of Pact implementations available for the benefit of such a diverse community. If I'm looking for *even more context* on the methods and goodies available for `pact-jvm` with `junit5`, would https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-jvm/blob/v4.1.x/consumer/junit5/src/main/kotlin/au/com/dius/pact/consumer/junit5/PactConsumerTestExt.kt be a good candidate?
yousafn
2021-04-30 08:35
Hey hey,
Just want to say that these two bits of docs are absolutely brilliant
https://pactflow.io/how-pact-works/
https://docs.pact.io/5-minute-getting-started-guide/
I particularly love the embedded repl projects, and link to a real broker. Imo in terms of getting people on board with the pact premise, it will be a gamechanger for me.
Many :taco: ?s for the contributors who helped make that awesome!
tjones
2021-04-30 08:40
I don't remember who made the diagrams, but I know that @bethskurrie lead the charge on those :taco:
matt.fellows
2021-04-30 10:12
Yep. The 5 minute guide is shit though (the in browser thing is bloody annoying)
matt.fellows
2021-04-30 10:12
when I get a chance, I want to replace with https://docs.pactflow.io/docs/tutorials
matt.fellows
2021-04-30 10:13
which part of the 5 minute guide is good - the content, the in-browser IDE thing or both?
matt.fellows
2021-04-30 10:14
Looks like it. Might be worth popping into #pact-jvm to see if others have any thoughts
yousafn
2021-04-30 10:44
Both, the repl would be handy if you could open it in a separate window to be able to explore the files, but I don?t think that it too necessary.
I think the first diagram shows the problem pact tries to solve, the 5 minute guide gives a nice overview in code/steps as what pact looks like at both ends (the consumer and provider) and being able to run the two reps to publish the contract and verify against a test broker without them having to set anything up.
It feels like a really nice pictorial overview of the workshop content.
Will check out new tutorials bud
matt.fellows
2021-04-30 10:47
to be fair, I basically used the same thing for the katacoda. The downside to katocoda is that you do need a GH account to login. The upside is, it works :stuck_out_tongue:
yousafn
2021-04-30 10:48
Those two examples worked for publishing and verifying tho :man-shrugging: at least I think they did, it was late haha
matt.fellows
2021-04-30 22:52
hmm, I thought I fixed it. It works locally but not on the site for some reason. Trying an absolute link instead
matt.fellows
2021-04-30 22:55
OK that seems to have fixed it Tomas: https://docs.pact.io/provider/recommended_configuration#verification-triggered-by-provider-change
agarwal.akash333
2021-05-06 01:30
This https://docs.pactflow.io/#configuring-your-api-token could really use a better layout in terms of headings. I keep getting lost.
matt.fellows
2021-05-06 02:51
Most of the content is in the last section, is that where it?s confusing?
agarwal.akash333
2021-05-06 02:51
Desktop, I?m talking about having sections for different languages :slightly_smiling_face:
agarwal.akash333
2021-05-06 02:53
Ah yep that?d be so helpful! Right now its barely sensible for me due to my OCD
agarwal.akash333
2021-05-06 03:11
So much more readable now! Clears up my confusion around junit5 and Gradle. Just to double check, is this still true?:
Gradle
Consumer
```pact {
publish {
providerVersion = { '<GIT_COMMIT>' } //yes, this field name is correct :(
}
}```
agarwal.akash333
2021-05-06 04:01
Hey Matt, apologies for coming back at this. The JVM links are broken
agarwal.akash333
2021-05-06 04:47
One of those links is probably supposed to point https://docs.pact.io/implementation_guides/jvm/provider/gradle/#publishing-pact-files-to-a-pact-broker
agarwal.akash333
2021-05-07 04:38
I would probably categorize some of the pages here like Maven, Gradle, Leiningen plugin, etc under another category called ?Provider verification?
matt.fellows
2021-05-07 05:09
They are currently (auto) generated based on the sub-project in Pact JVM github repo
agarwal.akash333
2021-05-07 05:13
Ah, thought so. I did submit a PR for renaming the Gradle page?s title. Can definitely follow the same for other pages
tjones
2021-05-12 23:19
We have some broken links that depend on how the page is loaded- for example, if you navigate directly here https://docs.pact.io/getting_started/how_pact_works/ , then the link back to the introduction doesn?t work. But if you navigate there from the menu then it does.
tjones
2021-05-13 00:46
This link is broken when you navigate to https://docs.pact.io/getting_started/how_pact_works/ directly
bethskurrie
2021-05-13 00:47
there's no server that says "remove the trailing slash". What is literally in the URL gets sent to the backend.
tjones
2021-05-13 00:47
There's something weird going on, too. The link leads to https://docs.pact.io/getting_started/ , which works
bethskurrie
2021-05-13 00:48
the link in the page will be a relative link "./" and it resolves differently based on whether you went to "foo" or "foo/index.html"
bethskurrie
2021-05-13 00:49
should be out in a couple of minutes. this is one of the reasons that I always use the full path for internal urls.
tjones
2021-05-13 00:55
Is there some way we can detect these automatically? I thought the docs generator had a broken link detector, but maybe I'm mistaken
bethskurrie
2021-05-13 01:10
There is a broken links detector, but I don't think it understands the difference between the slash/no slash thing
fnguyen
2021-06-14 18:22
You could look https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-specification but typically, the pact would not be hand written but generated.
vinicius.grund
2021-06-14 18:25
I'm building a Pact generator from OpenAPI and I'm trying to figure out the Pact schema
uglyog
2021-06-14 23:24
There are some JSON schema's https://bitbucket.org/atlassian/pact-json-schema/src/master/
matt.fellows
2021-06-15 00:05
Also have you read https://docs.pact.io/faq/#can-i-generate-my-pact-file-from-something-like-swagger ?
matt.fellows
2021-06-15 12:04
Generating a pact file from a swagger file is fine, but you need to ensure that your consumer code is compatible with with the swagger, otherwise you don't get any guarantees..
I can see ways to do that, the most obvious being generating a swagger from types
vinicius.grund
2021-06-15 12:23
I'm exporting the OpenAPI as a file automatically. Assuming that there is no real consumer, I'm don't wanna wait a real consumer to ensure my contracts, it's beatiful but not a real life. In that case I always have at least one contract, ensuring the my API doesn't change.
matt.fellows
2021-06-15 22:01
Looking forward to seeing how you deal with `anyOf` and `oneOf` :rolling_on_the_floor_laughing:
sams.prashanth
2021-06-23 10:29
Hey @matt.fellows is there any documentation with the commands to publish OpenApi Provider Contract and verification results to pactflow?
sams.prashanth
2021-06-23 10:29
I see this link https://docs.pactflow.io/docs/workshops/bi-directional/contracts/pact/#publishing-the-provider-contract--results-to-pactflow
But there are no CLI cmds that push provider contracts along with the verification results
matt.fellows
2021-06-23 13:14
we?re still taking feedback on the approach before we build external tooling into e.g. the Pact CLI tools
bethskurrie
2021-06-23 22:28
@sams.prashanth the reason there is no CLI tool to publish the verification results is that they have to be published within the test task itself, because if it fails, there will be no task that runs afterwards.
bethskurrie
2021-06-23 22:29
The results aren't written to a disk for a follow up task to publish (like the contracts) they're stored in memory.
phil.armstrong
2021-07-02 12:08
Hi I have a question about the pact-stub-server if that's ok? We are investigating using pact and wanted to utilize the contracts to generate our mocks for browser tests. I've got everything setup locally using docker and its working. On our broker we have an endpoint with 2 different states, the pact-stub-server always returns the first state, is there a way to toggle which is returned?
steve.etherington
2021-07-19 11:38
Hi,
I remember a seeing a diagram showing a provider test that only tested the request handling code, not the business logic and dependencies. The document said this was analogous to consumer tests which only tested the request and response handling. I can?t find it anymore; can anyone point me to this doc or presentation?
tjones
2021-07-20 02:53
I was looking for that the other day too, so if anyone knows I'd love to find it
tjones
2021-07-20 02:58
There are a couple of diagrams that might be similar to what you are looking for in my talk here:
https://youtu.be/wkld_wRsTDE?t=1939
and
https://youtu.be/wkld_wRsTDE?t=1977
tjones
2021-07-20 02:58
(I just put the timestamps to where the diagrams were, I didn't look for the start of the explanation)
tjones
2021-07-20 02:59
I think this diagram has the key point:
https://youtu.be/wkld_wRsTDE?t=2371
which is "Pact tests are not functional tests, but it's good if they have incidental functional coverage".
bethskurrie
2021-07-20 06:00
@steve.etherington are you talking about this? https://docs.pact.io/consumer/contract_tests_not_functional_tests
steve.etherington
2021-07-20 08:26
Thanks, for these pointers, I will look at them in more detail.
I may have been thinking of the first image in this section
https://docs.pact.io/5-minute-getting-started-guide#testing-the-order-api-provider-project, and the first bullet point in the choices
```Invoke just the controller layer (in an MVC app, or the "Adapter" in our diagram) and stub out layers beneath```
(though it might have been the same diagram in a video ?) I think though that all 3 options are going to invoke the whole http stack.
kamoljan
2021-07-25 02:01
there is a spelling issue on this page https://pactflow.io/what-are-the-benefits-of-contract-testing/
tjones
2021-07-25 02:36
What's the spelling mistake? (sorry, I don't see it in the screenshot after a few reads)
bethskurrie
2021-07-25 23:13
@steve.etherington there is debate about that in the pact community, but I think just testing the Adapter layer is risky. The benefit of pact over schema testing is that you get confirmation of the expected response based on your inputs, and business logic determines which of the potential responses will be returned.
dimundo
2021-08-05 06:48
hi
https://docs.pact.io/pact_broker/advanced_topics/selectors/
`Matrix selectors` link is broken -> https://docs.pact.io/pact_broker/advanced_topics/selectors/matrix_selectors
bethskurrie
2021-08-05 06:50
Thanks. It's here https://docs.pact.io/pact_broker/advanced_topics/matrix_selectors
tjones
2021-08-12 11:54
Ah, that turns out to be in an autogenerated section of the docs. I'm not sure how that works. I'll open an issue for someone who knows.
dimundo
2021-08-12 21:01
hi!
question about https://docs.pact.io/pact_broker/administration/maintenance/#examples
> The selectors combine by AND, so `[{"max_age": 30}, { "latest": true, tag: true }, { "tag": "production" }]` would be ?keep everything that?s less than 30 days old AND keep the latest version for every pacticipant/tag AND keep all the production versions?.
for me it looks like OR, some rephrase needed
> The selectors combine by OR, so `[{"max_age": 30}, { "latest": true, tag: true }, { "tag": "production" }]` would be ?keep everything that?s less than 30 days old , keep the latest version for every pacticipant/tag , keep all the production versions?.
if it would be AND it would mean ?keep latest production version, which is not older than 30 days?
j3rry.wan9
2021-08-13 08:54
Hi, where I can find more documentation about generators? I saw someone uses `headerFromProviderState` (pact-jvm) in the consumer tests, I'm trying to understand how generators work.
phil.endsley
2021-08-13 13:23
Are you looking for jvm specific docs? For using the 'FromProviderState' methods: https://docs.pact.io/implementation_guides/jvm/consumer/#having-values-injected-from-provider-state-callbacks
uglyog
2021-08-14 04:27
That's a good point, the generators are mostly implicit in the V3 matching rules. They need to be documented.
uglyog
2021-08-14 04:28
@matt.fellows @bethskurrie @tjones we need a documentation project to collect all these things.
tjones
2021-08-14 06:13
I can take a look after the major release in pact-js, but that might be a while
wenqiglantz
2021-09-05 00:53
Check out my article on Medium on using Pact for testing event driven pub/sub messaging with Dapr within Spring Boot microservices. https://medium.com/codex/consumer-driven-contract-testing-with-pact-f8a28a8a7c3c
sadikshahidain
2021-09-22 01:50
(Sorry if this is the wrong channel for this. If it is lmk and I can move it)
Does anyone know where I can find information on how the Ruby standalone service validates headers?
TL;DR
I was trying to write consumer tests for an older PHP service today, but ran into issues with some of the requests having a (non-standard?) "HTTP Protocol" header set to "HTTP/1.1", leading to 4xx responses/"Bad Request" exceptions from the mock server.
AFAICT these headers aren't even needed on the (1) provider side so I was thinking of just removing them, but I was curious as to why this might be happening in the first place (and didn't seem to find any info in the mock server's log file about it either)
Thanks in advance!
tjones
2021-09-22 07:44
Probably better asked in the ruby or ruby standalone channel. It feels like maybe that's not a valid header and so the http library is refusing to accept the request?
tjones
2021-09-22 07:45
We sometimes run into this with invalid cases (eg http bodies where there aren't meant to be) - it's hard for us to handle non-standards compliant request/response pairs because pact is implemented in several different languages, and we don't really control the http libraries that are used in all languages.
tjones
2021-09-22 07:47
There might be something else going on, though. I don't think it's invalid to make up your own header names.
tjones
2021-09-22 07:50
Ah, if it is literally `HTTP Protocol: HTTP/1.1` I think it's invalid because of the space in the header name
tjones
2021-09-22 07:51
From RFC 2616:
```message-header = field-name ":" [ field-value ]
field-name = token
token = 1*<any CHAR except CTLs or separators>
separators = "(" | ")" | "<" | ">" | "@" | "," | ";" | ":" | "\"
| <"> | "/" | "[" | "]" | "?" | "=" | "{" | "}" | SP | HT```
sadikshahidain
2021-09-24 02:39
Ahh perfect!! Thank you so much for this :pray:
Now if only I could figure out why that was put there in the 1st place to feel better about taking it out :fearful:
bethskurrie
2021-10-06 08:49
If anyone is looking for something to do for Hacktoberfest, would love some matcher examples here https://github.com/pact-foundation/docs.pact.io/issues/88
tjones
2021-10-06 10:41
Yes yes yes! I'm happy to help with pointers for anyone wanting to work on this
mike.geeves064
2021-10-06 21:11
Sort of on my list when I had tried looking at rust logging but erm, progress slow :disappointed:
I did wonder about themes for the docs, it might be "nice" if there's a common theme for examples for consistency rather than if everyone does something completely different in each language
mike.geeves064
2021-10-07 11:32
(that's not in any way saying to anyone else "don't do it, it's mine!" btw :slightly_smiling_face:)
zhaoyi0113
2021-10-16 05:52
Does pact support event driven contract testing? I remember I saw it somewhere but can find the doc now.
b.1.alpha
2021-11-01 23:56
Hi I am running the slick new tutorial on https://katacoda.com/pact/scenarios/pactflow-can-i-deploy-js and getting an error step 4 of 8. `$ npm run publish`
b.1.alpha
2021-11-01 23:58
I am also in the continuation state from the basic https://katacoda.com/pact/scenarios/pactflow-getting-started-js. So it seemed like all duplication of that lesson, up until it broke
b.1.alpha
2021-11-02 00:00
$ npm run publish
> pactflow-getting-started-js@0.1.0 publish /root
> npx pact-broker publish ./pacts --consumer-app-version 1.0.0-someconsumersha --tag master
/root/node_modules/@pact-foundation/pact-node/standalone/linux-x64-1.88.77/pact/lib/vendor/ruby/2.2.0/gems/pact_broker-client-1.56.0/lib/pact_broker/client/hal/http_client.rb:49:in `create_request': undefined method `request_uri' for #<URI::Generic company.pactflow.io?> (NoMethodError)
from /root/node_modules/@pact-foundation/pact-node/standalone/linux-x64-1.88.77/pact/lib/vendor/ruby/2.2.0/gems/pact_broker-client-1.56.0/lib/pact_broker/client/hal/http_client.rb:25:in `get'
from /root/node_modules/@pact-foundation/pact-node/standalone/linux-x64-1.88.77/pact/lib/vendor/ruby/2.2.0/gems/pact_broker-client-1.56.0/lib/pact_broker/client/hal/link.rb:41:in `get'
from /root/node_modules/@pact-foundation/pact-node/standalone/linux-x64-1.88.77/pact/lib/vendor/ruby/2.2.0/gems/pact_broker-client-1.56.0/lib/pact_broker/client/hal/link.rb:45:in `get!'
from /root/node_modules/@pact-foundation/pact-node/standalone/linux-x64-1.88.77/pact/lib/vendor/ruby/2.2.0/gems/pact_broker-client-1.56.0/lib/pact_broker/client/hal_client_methods.rb:20:in `index_resource'
from /root/node_modules/@pact-foundation/pact-node/standalone/linux-x64-1.88.77/pact/lib/vendor/ruby/2.2.0/gems/pact_broker-client-1.56.0/lib/pact_broker/client/publish_pacts.rb:31:in `call'
from /root/node_modules/@pact-foundation/pact-node/standalone/linux-x64-1.88.77/pact/lib/vendor/ruby/2.2.0/gems/pact_broker-client-1.56.0/lib/pact_broker/client/publish_pacts.rb:14:in `call'
from /root/node_modules/@pact-foundation/pact-node/standalone/linux-x64-1.88.77/pact/lib/vendor/ruby/2.2.0/gems/pact_broker-client-1.56.0/lib/pact_broker/client/cli/broker.rb:157:in `publish_pacts'
from /root/node_modules/@pact-foundation/pact-node/standalone/linux-x64-1.88.77/pact/lib/vendor/ruby/2.2.0/gems/pact_broker-client-1.56.0/lib/pact_broker/client/cli/broker.rb:42:in `publish'
from /root/node_modules/@pact-foundation/pact-node/standalone/linux-x64-1.88.77/pact/lib/vendor/ruby/2.2.0/gems/thor-1.1.0/lib/thor/command.rb:27:in `run'
from /root/node_modules/@pact-foundation/pact-node/standalone/linux-x64-1.88.77/pact/lib/vendor/ruby/2.2.0/gems/thor-1.1.0/lib/thor/invocation.rb:127:in `invoke_command'
from /root/node_modules/@pact-foundation/pact-node/standalone/linux-x64-1.88.77/pact/lib/vendor/ruby/2.2.0/gems/thor-1.1.0/lib/thor.rb:392:in `dispatch'
from /root/node_modules/@pact-foundation/pact-node/standalone/linux-x64-1.88.77/pact/lib/vendor/ruby/2.2.0/gems/thor-1.1.0/lib/thor/base.rb:485:in `start'
from /root/node_modules/@pact-foundation/pact-node/standalone/linux-x64-1.88.77/pact/lib/vendor/ruby/2.2.0/gems/pact_broker-client-1.56.0/lib/pact_broker/client/cli/custom_thor.rb:15:in `start'
from /root/node_modules/@pact-foundation/pact-node/standalone/linux-x64-1.88.77/pact/lib/app/pact-broker.rb:34:in `<main>'
npm ERR! code ELIFECYCLE
npm ERR! errno 1
npm ERR! pactflow-getting-started-js@0.1.0 publish: `npx pact-broker publish ./pacts --consumer-app-version 1.0.0-someconsumersha --tag master`
npm ERR! Exit status 1
npm ERR!
npm ERR! Failed at the pactflow-getting-started-js@0.1.0 publish script.
npm ERR! This is probably not a problem with npm. There is likely additional logging output above.
npm ERR! A complete log of this run can be found in:
npm ERR! /root/.npm/_logs/2021-11-01T23_59_26_882Z-debug.log
$
sureshbabudevaki
2021-11-10 19:20
Does pact support testing the Apache Camel Integrations? I found little information on provider side verification at below link
https://kb.tomd.xyz/pact.html
But there is no information available about Consumer side implementation for generating the pact file.
Please help me out if anyone has got some examples/information related to Pact testing a Apache Camel Spring Boot application.
matt.fellows
2021-11-11 00:31
We don?t have any Camel integration that I know of. The main point, is finding the piece of code that is responsible for communicating to the integration point, and writing a unit test for that using Pact
mike.geeves064
2021-11-11 09:29
I was wondering about that a while ago, I would have thought mostly it's essentially Message rather than HTTP... but for Camel in general I wasn't sure if there's a use case (at least where I used Camel) since it had all the routes in and out itself, and the Camel testing was pretty awesome once you got your head around how it worked. I've only seen where Camel is both the Consumer and the Producer apart from say an end "go push a file here to finish" :smile:
Although looking at that example linked it's about a REST API, in which case if that is a Consumer outside of the Camel service anyway, I don't think the Camel part is relevant: it's just whatever Consumer language you are using to call the REST API with that would need the tests to generate the Pacts
matt.fellows
2021-12-08 07:07
So @mike.geeves064 raised a good question - is there a place to document issues with our broader documentation? canny is not really the idea place, because it?s not really a feature (maybe) and in most github locations it?s too specific to capture general things that need to be done (e.g. consistent examples).
matt.fellows
2021-12-08 07:07
Wondering if perhaps a good place to start is creating a discussion here: https://github.com/pact-foundation/docs.pact.io/discussions/
mike.geeves064
2021-12-08 10:09
I've chucked some initial thoughts in a Miro board: https://miro.com/app/board/uXjVOcDlpaQ=/?invite_link_id=819331897685 not proposing a Miro board is the right way to go, but I find having something with a few examples helps figure out what structure may be needed
matt.fellows
2021-12-08 10:20
Good idea. It's a nice option for expressing ideas in an exploratory way, that's for sure
mike.geeves064
2021-12-08 10:56
Nod. From a first pass I ended up with those three streams which I think makes sense as almost projects: repo specific, actual docs, and CI/CD (which feels big/important enough to warrant its own section)
mike.geeves064
2021-12-08 14:06
I've not tried GitHub discussions before, I get a 404 currently though? :thinking_face:
yousafn
2021-12-08 21:55
I <3 miro boards. They are our go to on client accounts and just help consolidate disparate information, thoughts, output and I think at least from experience got people to think about expressing their work with diagrams and visuals, rather than walls of text.
We found Trello good for a colloborative lo fi Kanban or agile workboards without the overhead of jira
yousafn
2021-12-08 22:01
I?ll happily add in some ideas from out experience when I am back at my desk and not on the phone, and review the board. The three streams are sound.
I always want to know the feature set, look for sdk docs on how to use it. Bonus points if there is links to the feature in the various languages and links to online fiddles so you can see working code.
Agree on ci/cd docs having a strong focus, especially as when pact or any tooling is in your ci/cd pipeline it starts becoming critical and having strong documentation especially at times of need. I know many times we?ve leveraged our aws or circleci docs when things have gone south long before we are picking up the phone to support
mike.geeves064
2021-12-08 22:28
Yeah, for me that's a big focus of trying to have as much parity across languages, I think having the same examples across languages would be really beneficial, but aware that's a mammoth task to do and keep updated :open_mouth:
The board there should be editable so feel free to make any changes, happy to leave it there if it's useful to brainstorm before going somewhere else etc
tjones
2021-12-09 00:22
Yes, it would be a significant improvement to have the same examples across languages
tjones
2021-12-09 00:23
I think possibly having the same structure (allowing automatic roll-up of documentation) across the repos might be a good way to achieve this
mike.geeves064
2021-12-09 08:55
I was wondering if something like that could work for filling in a matrix
mike.geeves064
2021-12-09 08:56
if you have pact-python/examples/bi-directional -> it's supported! of not, assume it isn't. over simplified but even if not per feature that could still help with figuring out which repos still need message examples, gitlabci and so on
mike.geeves064
2021-12-16 09:55
Any more thoughts on this? I've been adding a few more todos on to the Miro board as I've seen things come up
mike.geeves064
2021-12-16 09:57
(either in terms of items to go on a list, or a "where next" if useful)
yousafn
2021-12-16 12:44
Finally had a chance to have a look @mike.geeves064, some great post it notes down. I?ve jotted a couple of thoughts as I had a spare 20 minute.
I always like to know what I am working with, exactly what is there and what it contains, weed out dead links, or deprecated docs.
That gives me a nice picture of the current estate, and allows me to pick up commonalities and differences.
Ideally we can then think of our target state, and how we can incrementally get there, and which of the levels will provide the biggest impact up front.
Super work though kicking this off!
mike.geeves064
2021-12-16 13:05
:+1:
Maybe identifying the current estate (as in the what repos are there and what they are for) would be a sensible place to start from, to then be able to identify what to do in each :thinking_face: Somewhere to make the todo lists from
yousafn
2021-12-16 14:08
i would be inclined to agree that as a pretty good starting point, it would be helpful in that regard, as if we build our list of features, we essentially can get a matrix together of features across each version,
mike.geeves064
2021-12-16 20:45
I'll add taking a look at that starting point to my to-do list, interacting with GitHub sounds fun :grinning: (along with finishing some python examples and looking at logging in Rust).
In taking a little break from going straight into trying to code Rust without knowing the language and trying the Advent of Code 2021 in Rust, still without knowing the language much :thinking_face:
:joy:
yousafn
2021-12-16 21:40
Hahaha amazing, I?ve been meaning to give rust a tickle and the advent of code sounded perfect for it. First time I had heard of it this year. I got up to day 5 in deno to see how far it had moved along in the last year but got distracted now on my sim rig.
Your to do list sounds fun :)
yousafn
2021-12-16 21:40
Thanks mate for the push on this, I am happy to help where I can as it?s a topic close to my heart ( and I?m definitely not as good as I could be with my own stuff )
zhaoyi0113
2021-12-31 05:46
I am looking at how `event driven` pact works and found this example but in kotlin: https://github.com/rafaroca/pact-msg/. Does anyone know whether there is a nodejs example I can have a look?
matt.fellows
2021-12-31 06:32
Also see the how pact works section on http://docs.pact.io for an explainer
muirandy
2022-01-12 12:30
Hi. I?m looking to put together some documentation on using PACT with Kafka and the Schema Registry. Any suggestions where I could put this? Happy to put it in a blog or something if there is nowhere better!
yousafn
2022-01-12 13:20
Hey Andy,
Amazing! Thanks for wanting to contribute to the community.
Blog posts are always a great way to start sharing with the community, and can be referenced via the http://docs.pact.io site https://docs.pact.io/blogs_videos_and_articles
There are some contribution tips on the website for both documentation and code https://docs.pact.io/contributing/docs
I?m sure others will be able to help advise but that is probably a good start.
I?ve only briefly dabbled in Kafka and not heard of the schema registry before.
matt.fellows
2022-01-12 22:11
Good question. I think your Java contribution might mean that the lessons aren?t perfectly valid across the ecosystem (i.e. if we need to support the magic bytes thing, it?ll need to go into the Rust core for other languages to benefit)
matt.fellows
2022-01-12 22:13
I?ve been thinking for a while now of creating a ?recipes? page (or something like it) in the docs, that links to common ways to use Pact - I even started it.
Perhaps I?ll push the page up, and you could write one about Kafka there? This would be more of a how-to guide.
An additional blog (on your platform or https://docs.pact.io/blog) would be nice too!
roy_collings
2022-01-26 11:51
Hey all :wave: Just a quick note that there's a mistake in the docs: https://docs.pactflow.io/docs/examples/java/provider-springboot/readme - the README doesn't line up with the code ("This is an example of a Node provider..." and mentions "https://github.com/pactflow/example-provider-springboot/blob/master/src/product/product.pact.test.js:" that isn't in the repo).
matt.fellows
2022-01-26 23:22
I?ve fixed the source repo, which should flow to the docs in due course. Thanks for reporting
muirandy
2022-01-27 21:51
I?ve put some (Java) code examples together.
I?m looking for some feedback. I? a bit troubled that I can write a Messaging test which passes, although the consumer and provider use completely different technologies (kafka and websocket!).
matt.fellows
2022-01-27 22:22
> I?m looking for some feedback. I? a bit troubled that I can write a Messaging test which passes, although the consumer and provider use completely different technologies (kafka and websocket!).
that?s because as far as message pact is concerned, we don?t care about the queueing technology, it?s purely about the messages
matt.fellows
2022-01-27 22:22
it?s how message pact _can_ test any intermediary (S3 bucket, Rabbit, Kinesis, Kafka, even a file transfer)
matt.fellows
2022-01-27 22:25
(as the plugins system evolves, I would expect people to start conttributing technology specific plugins - e.g. kafka, Lambda, SQS etc.
muirandy
2022-01-27 22:54
I?m expecting to write things up in a blog or two. I?ll let you know when I have some words together.
muirandy
2022-01-31 18:12
I?ve got some text together, though I?m not finished. Other than adding it to a blog, is the ?recipes? section available that I could raise a PR for?
Part 1 of my text is to make things work using JSON on Kafka. I have a draft version here (not for public consumption!): https://gist.github.com/muirandy/a8befce6ad53aa25d00aeb51e46edcef
Part 2 follows on, and makes the required changes to work with Schema Registry.
patrice.krakow
2022-02-03 17:01
Hello! I have just submitted a PR - https://github.com/pact-foundation/docs.pact.io/pull/104 - and I am getting a failing check with "Semantic Pull Request", I have tried the prefix "fix:" and "docs:" (following https://github.com/zeke/semantic-pull-requests), but it did not solve the failing check... Could you help me? Thanks :-)
patrice.krakow
2022-02-11 11:35
When trying to run the "Pact Docs Website" locally, using `docker-compose up`, I got the following error:
```[ERROR] Error: The "googleAnalytics" field in themeConfig should now be specified as option for plugin-google-analytics. For preset-classic, simply move themeConfig.googleAnalytics to preset options. More information at https://github.com/facebook/docusaurus/pull/5832.```
matt.fellows
2022-02-13 07:52
Hmm Tha ka for letting us know. Wondering if perhaps the compose setup is out of date. I personally normally `npm start`and works just fine. I'll review tomorrow
matt.fellows
2022-02-13 23:50
OK looks like the container has pulled in the latest docusaurus configs, which has moved some config items around. I?ve just fixed those now - thanks for reporting
muirandy
2022-02-16 11:18
Hi Matt. Thanks for the comments. I?ve created a PR with your suggested code gates etc - hopefully I?ve not made a mess by editing things locally and trying to change the 1st commit message.
I?ll look at creating some more content for working with Schema Registry.
matt.fellows
2022-02-16 11:28
we can just get it in, and if it looks sh*t we can iterate :slightly_smiling_face:
muirandy
2022-02-16 18:23
Oh? as far as I can tell, I should be ok to publish my blog with the same content, augmented with some explanations?
matt.fellows
2022-02-16 21:40
hmmm the docs should deploy immediately, I?ll have a look. I?m guessing somethnig is breaking in the netlify deployment
muirandy
2022-02-17 16:28
There may be a problem with a link? for instance, on the recipes page if I click the link to ?kafka?, I end up at: https://docs.pact.io/recipes/recipes/kafka
Thats a 404 - but not the duplicated ?recipes/recipes??
yousafn
2022-02-17 17:21
Hey Andy, this is your change right ? https://github.com/pact-foundation/docs.pact.io/commit/bd1a3b4b2ce21ba92799971409077f22d457220f
I can see it live on the site, and from the https://docs.pact.io/recipes the url is absolute when highlighting over the `kafka` link and my redirect was ok. Testing this in chrome, not tried other browsers.
muirandy
2022-02-17 18:09
Interesting? for me, the left-hand-nav works fine. From the ?Recipes? page though, link is wrong - duplicated ?recipes?.
kyle.florence
2022-02-17 21:29
it appears the link to the pact cli documentation is no longer valid: https://docs.pact.io/pact_broker/client_cli/readme (as linked to from https://docs.pact.io/pact_broker/client_cli/)
bethskurrie
2022-02-17 21:30
I did notice the docs build was broken earlier this week, but I haven't had time to look at it.
bethskurrie
2022-02-17 21:34
```"Pact Broker Client CLI": [
"pact_broker/client_cli",
"pact_broker/client_cli/readme",
"pact_broker/client_cli/changelog"
],```
bethskurrie
2022-02-17 21:37
looks like it's a "feature" https://docusaurus.io/docs/sidebar/autogenerated#category-index-convention
bethskurrie
2022-02-17 22:11
This line in the pact-net readme is causing the sync script to blow up because the text inside the brackets is not a valid URL.
bethskurrie
2022-02-17 22:11
`- [Join](<(http://slack.pact.io)>) our community [slack workspace](http://pact-foundation.slack.com/).`
bethskurrie
2022-02-17 22:11
It doesn't seem to be actually working anyway (the "Join" text is not a link) so I'm going to remove that bit.
bethskurrie
2022-02-17 22:15
Ok, the readmes are back. Luckily docusarus is configurable enough to allow you to override their features.
yousafn
2022-02-17 22:42
Good spot, thanks buddy https://github.com/pact-foundation/docs.pact.io/pull/110
matt.fellows
2022-02-18 00:20
Thanks Beth. That might have been me moving from alpha to beta. We had another contributor find an issue with the local setup (I think unpinned minor dependency change).
When I addressed that, and some minor config movements, it looks like I may have screwed that up
matt.fellows
2022-02-18 00:20
I think we ought to get the build to fail if it detects broken links, which I think I saw in the Netlify output
muirandy
2022-02-18 11:51
Cool. I?ve published the first part of my blog on this topic. It contains more of an explanation than fits in a ?recipe?, but has the same examples: https://muirandy.wordpress.com/2022/02/18/contract-testing-with-pact-kafka-and-schema-registry-part-1/
muirandy
2022-02-18 11:56
I?m working on Part 2, where I?ll demonstrate the Kafka Schema Registry compliant Consumers and Providers? I intend to add to the ?recipes? page too, so keep your eyes open! :slightly_smiling_face:
yousafn
2022-02-18 13:31
Awesome work buddy, I?ll give it a read today and give it a repost as well. I?ve just written my first blog post in a looong time today. It?s addictive
muirandy
2022-02-28 15:56
Hi @matt.fellows and @yousafn
I have created a PR for docs for the Schema Registry compliant JSON: https://github.com/pact-foundation/docs.pact.io/pull/114
Let me know what you make of it! As before, I have a blog post standing by, containing much the same content.
yousafn
2022-02-28 15:59
Hey @muirandy, thanks for this :green_heart:
I will have a look later this evening and give it a stamp if it's all good.
Your last blog post has been getting some attention after I reshared it. I couldn't find you on linkedIn to add and tag you. I'm https://www.linkedin.com/in/yousaf-nabi-54278b3/ if you want to add me, and I can tag you with the appropriate credit. Nice one again buddy
yousafn
2022-02-28 16:53
Gave it a review now buddy, couple of tiny points but you have an approval from me
edouard.lopez
2022-03-01 10:53
Hello, I'm not able to search the documentation anymore, anyone else impacted?
matt.fellows
2022-03-01 20:45
It looks like an update to docusaurus might be responsible. Canonical tags look incorrect leading to the search engine skipping most pages indexing
muirandy
2022-03-02 18:51
Hi @yousafn I have made the changes as suggested - hope its looking better! :slightly_smiling_face:
muirandy
2022-03-02 18:52
BTW - the code is here: https://github.com/muirandy/pact-kafka-schema-registry-demo
muirandy
2022-03-02 18:54
Feck - not sure if I did the right thing there - I closed the PR with a comment? can I recover from that or do I need to start again?!
yousafn
2022-03-02 19:31
Proper reminded me of Father Jack there with the Feck. It's sorted and approved, will get it merged this evening my good man.
muirandy
2022-03-02 21:20
Once its merged and live I?ll publish the blog post. Again.. its much the same but with a little more narrative.
yousafn
2022-03-02 21:51
Hey Andy, this has just been merged now, thanks again, but it reminds me that there are some broken links on the page, so the last time we were here and I updated the broken links.
https://github.com/pact-foundation/docs.pact.io/issues/112
muirandy
2022-03-02 23:17
Looks like I got the Headings a bit wrong. Line 174 shouldn?t be a Level 1? I?ll tidy it up for another PR? :)
yousafn
2022-03-02 23:49
If you'd like to take a look at the broken links issue, you are welcome too, but it's possibly not the most effective use of your time, and oddly, the behaviour appears have reversed from the last time I replied to that post, so it may be a mini time sink.
And no worries, just ping us when its ready and we will get that approved and merged.
muirandy
2022-03-03 20:41
matt.fellows
2022-03-04 10:11
Oh, so one minor nit picky thing (this, and the other blog both very well written).
Despite the logo maybe suggesting otherwise, the project is just Pact.
david.vancouvering
2022-03-08 21:42
Hey there. I went to this page on workshops, and it looks really interesting and potentially useful, but there are no links to the actual material. Am I missing something? Thanks!
https://docs.pactflow.io/docs/workshops
david.vancouvering
2022-03-08 21:43
Yea I tried to delete this request because I just figured it out. I knew I was missing something
will.robinson
2022-03-14 09:49
Hey,
I?m doing some reading up of webhooks in PactFlow and this is a dead link - is this bit of docs anywhere else that i am missing? https://docs.pactflow.io/docs/user-interface.html#settings-webhooks
yousafn
2022-03-14 15:05
Thanks @will.robinson, I'll get this updated now. It shouldn't have the `.html` in the url.
The link should be https://docs.pactflow.io/docs/user-interface/#settings-webhooks however to note, it as moved to a new location, see below :thumbsup:
The new link is https://docs.pactflow.io/docs/user-interface/settings/webhooks
yousafn
2022-03-15 00:11
:tada: Pleased to announce that we have the search functionality working again on https://docs.pact.io/
Thanks for the report @edouard.lopez :slightly_smiling_face:
rafael.anachoreta
2022-03-28 13:06
Hey team!:wave: @yousafn and I were talking about some potential improvement opportunities for the new branch + record deployments approach in favor of tags, and I was sharing how I feel like the documentation hasn?t properly reflected the best practices throughout its various pages.
Some examples:
? Does ?latest? pacts apply to branches too? Assuming you only have branches and no tags, will it work? This isn?t clear and isn?t reflected in the branches documentation https://docs.pact.io/pact_broker/tags#latest-pacts and https://docs.pact.io/pact_broker/tags#when-retrieving-pacts-to-verify
? There is no way to identify versions by environment using the new record-deployment approach https://docs.pact.io/pact_broker/tags#identifying-versions-by-tag and https://pact.canny.io/feature-requests/p/support-environmentreleases-on-describe-version
? This mention of environments and can-i-deploy is outdated in the context of the new `record-deployment` /`record-releases` https://docs.pact.io/pact_broker/tags#before-deploying-to-an-environment
? This section is outdated: https://docs.pact.io/pact_broker/branches#support (I think this is a known problem and a hard one to circumvent, so it?s ok)
? The recommended configuration for providers is outdated https://docs.pact.io/provider/recommended_configuration#verification-triggered-by-provider-change
? The recommended configuration for consumers is outdated https://docs.pact.io/consumer/recommended_configuration
Overall, my proposal involves mostly migrating all the information we have on https://docs.pact.io/pact_broker/tags to https://docs.pact.io/pact_broker/branches, and updating it where applicable.
Relevant PR and discussion: https://github.com/pact-foundation/docs.pact.io/pull/103
CC: @bethskurrie
yousafn
2022-03-28 14:39
Love the effort @rafael.anachoreta, this is a really beneficial endeavour to get the spotlight on areas which need some love and hopefully we can do something collaborative.
@mike.geeves064 started collecting some discussion around where best to track these kind of pieces of work, and potential areas of focus, so this leads neatly into it, but there is still some loose ends around how best to gather these thoughts into actionable items and a roadmap, so people can easily contribute.
https://pact-foundation.slack.com/archives/CAN147DFD/p1638947223038000
The google season of docs proposals and case studies from last year have given me loads of food for thought
https://developers.google.com/season-of-docs/docs/2021/participants
I found redoclys one particularly resonated with our challenges
yousafn
2022-03-29 12:12
Hey @rafael.anachoreta just as a heads up, I have a fairly packed week with a few things on for review, but want to definitely pick up this thread near the tail end, or next week.
If you wanted to propose any changes in the mean-time, I can take the time out to support them otherwise I will be in touch shortly.
If anyone reading wants to get involved, then please reach out. The content on our site becomes alive when it's expertly curated by our community so I am _loving_ all the attention folks are giving it.
matthew.churcher
2022-03-29 15:10
Any one here familiar with the bi-drectional testing coding kata. I'd appreciate some support and have a couple of snags to report
yousafn
2022-03-29 15:18
Hi @matthew.churcher, Matt (one of the co-founders) is most familiar as he set it up but he is also on AL for a few days.
I've just visited the site now and it is returned a cloudflare 502 (reloaded and it's back!)
https://katacoda.com/pact/scenarios/pactflow-bi-directional-contracts-intro
The source code is here https://github.com/pactflow/katacoda-workshops if you want to raise any issues directly against the repository.
Otherwise feel free to ask your questions away either in here, or possibly the #pactflow channel as we may have more members int that channel who have used the Katacoda. I don't think our usage is massive via the Katacoda's over our traditional examples so really pleased to get some feedback and see how we can help :slightly_smiling_face:
Edit:- For reference for anyone following, this particular katacoda workshop (and others) are linked from this page in our Pactflow documentation https://docs.pactflow.io/docs/tutorials/#bi-directional-contract-testing
david.vancouvering
2022-03-29 17:09
I published an initial draft of a doc PR for feature toggles. Feedback much appreciated! Still need to figure out the provider workflow, so that's a `TODO` but wanted your feedback on the rest. https://github.com/pact-foundation/docs.pact.io/pull/133/
alejandro.velez
2022-03-30 20:32
hello! submitted a PR for some small typos on the `Recommended configuration for verifying pacts` page https://github.com/pact-foundation/docs.pact.io/pull/135 let me know if this is ok, or needs any changes :slightly_smiling_face:
bethskurrie
2022-03-30 20:45
@rafael.anachoreta thanks for the feedback. You're absolutely right, the docs are out of date. The problem has been that not all the clients support branches and environments yet, so I haven't been able to do a full update of best practice recommendations.
bethskurrie
2022-03-30 20:53
The question is - do we wait for all the clients to be updated and go straight to just documenting branches and envs, or do we update it now and have both the tag and branch/env docs side by side.
mike.geeves064
2022-03-30 20:54
Having a few chats with Yousaf, I think he's making a few lists and lists of lists :)
bethskurrie
2022-03-30 21:03
it's tricky, because I know there will be users stuck on versions of the broker/clients that can only use tags for years.
bethskurrie
2022-03-30 21:04
it's often hard for devs to be able to justify the time in upgrading libraries.
mike.geeves064
2022-03-30 21:32
"how will I know it worked" -> "everything you can see will look exactly the same unless it doesn't" were some of the hardest arguments :smiling_face_with_tear:
mike.geeves064
2022-03-30 21:34
:thinking_face: would making old (deprecated) docs more polished be of value to help guide "but what about this" in the new approach?
yousafn
2022-03-30 21:44
If we are
? clear about the libraries that don't support it on a feature matrix perhaps https://docs.pact.io/roadmap/feature_support
? We can then provide a path for request it http://pact.canny.io and show it on a roadmap
that way I think it's fine to show that this way is new, recommend, caveat not everyone supports it
and this is the old way that everything supports (if indeed it does)
yousafn
2022-03-30 21:44
I love the fact everyone is loving wanting to make the docs better. You guys/girls :blush:
rafael.anachoreta
2022-03-31 11:52
I?ll have a look at all the PRs later today to see how/if I can contribute. Thank you all for so promptly jumping into this and moving the discussion! :heart:
yousafn
2022-04-07 17:14
Hey all,
Would just love to give a MASSIVE shoutout to @david.vancouvering, who submitted an incredible 4 substantial PR's for our docs site.
? https://github.com/pact-foundation/docs.pact.io/pull/126 to bring into a new CI/CD guide
? woven into the guide to Pact Nirvana via this https://github.com/pact-foundation/docs.pact.io/pull/128 and is now today live.
You can view it here - https://docs.pact.io/pact_nirvana
We also have these two outstanding for review
? https://github.com/pact-foundation/docs.pact.io/pull/133 - best practise for feature toggles, you can view this on our temp deploy https://deploy-preview-133--docs-pact-io.netlify.app/getting_started/feature_toggles
? https://github.com/pact-foundation/docs.pact.io/pull/127 - Pact Conceptual model, you can view this on our temp deploy https://deploy-preview-127--docs-pact-io.netlify.app/getting_started/conceptual_overview
We would appreciate any comments, feedback or even better submissions, after all it's your tool, we are just the custodians.
Thank you so much @david.vancouvering :thank_you: :pactflow-platypus-slack: :pray::yellow_heart:
yousafn
2022-04-21 10:31
Beginning to think about recipes and examples, and making our documentation amazing.
Would love to get some input and inspiration.
? Does anyone have any great benchmarks, of documentation you've thought was really top class,
? Have you seen recipes that were useful, for the kinds of use cases, you actually have, or are they usually too clean and far removed from real world implementations
? Is there any particular things you would like to see showcased
? What particular formats resonate with people? I know with the advent of youtube, and online courses people are learning in a multitude of different ways.
As part of this initiative I have started capturing some initial brain dumps of the information I have found in a couple of GH issues
https://github.com/pact-foundation/docs.pact.io/issues/137
https://github.com/pact-foundation/docs.pact.io/issues/88
Any input is welcome, beginners and seasoned Pact pro's alike.
Equally if you want to get involved from an early stage and shape the future of our documentation, please do get in touch.
We will look to get an open proposal in place and start up something like a Pact season of Docs session where will we invite everyone to get involved.
matt.fellows
2022-04-21 12:54
I?ve always thought the Cypress documentation was pretty good. I like that they split the API usage, from the Guides, but have the examples and workshops front and centre
matt.fellows
2022-04-21 12:57
I recall loving FastAPI because it was so easy to use. The docs aren?t friendly as I remember, but I think we do a bad job of explaining our *features* to people.
FastAPI https://fastapi.tiangolo.com/features/ do ok
I?ve tried making the new (2.x.x) Pact Go docs a bit nicer with this intent: https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-go/tree/2.x.x
matt.fellows
2022-04-21 12:58
AWS docs (controversial). They?re good, and you don?t realise they are good until you use another big product and realise how fragmented other product documentation is (and their APIs).
AWS are so bloody consistent, it makes it easy to guess command names, flags etc.
chris.williams
2022-05-09 10:03
Hi - I've been watching the Bi-directional videos and reading the examples - very nice by the way - but I can't see how we can handle state, which is a big thing when you're testing an API, obviously!
Can we have an example of how:
? A consumer would test against a success (200) and failure (401) against a login endpoint
? How a provider would test those
chris.williams
2022-05-09 10:06
It's a simple example that I can't seem to find - in our current implementation we have things like
```.given('a user exists and has transactions')```
in our consumer tests, and in our provider tests, a method that takes this state and sets up the data/mocking needed to be able to emulate that state
yousafn
2022-05-09 10:09
states are not used in BDCT as you do not have fine-grained control over the provider in the same way as regular Pact CDCT.
yousafn
2022-05-09 10:10
> ? A consumer would test against a success (200) and failure (401) against a login endpoint
They would setup a provider mock to return 200 or 401 for a specific test case, and generate a Pact contract from a successful match
yousafn
2022-05-09 10:13
> ? How a provider would test those
With any functional testing tool, we do not mandate the providers choice here, the provider should test any endpoints they expose in an openAPI spec, to provide strong confidence that the implemented service, matches the documented specification. This evidence is uploaded to Pactflow when publishing the provider spec, and forms the provider contract.
The bi-directional check, will ensure that the pact contracts generated by the client form a subset of the providers contract, but this check is static, so does not exercise the real provider
yousafn
2022-05-09 10:16
I think you have just got a bit mixed up here buddy, the above is for CDCT and we have plenty of examples.
Would love to know if there is something in the docs which has led you to this path, or if there is something we can had to clear this up.
chris.williams
2022-05-09 10:28
Ok, so (whitewashing over a lot of the complexity), if my provider has tested a `200` and `401` state, and it's in the generated OpenAPI, and my consumer has mocked a `200` and `401` , then the BDCT will marry those two up and give it a green light ?
chris.williams
2022-05-09 10:29
We (thankfully) already have all our integration tests test against a Swagger file, to ensure that the input/output is validated, so we have that 'strong confidence' as you put it
yousafn
2022-05-09 10:31
Even if your provider hasn't tested it, but it's in the spec, and the pact files generated can be satisfied by the spec, then BDCT can-I-deploy will give you the green light.
So in essence it's a _maybe_ rather than firm YES, offered by CDCT with Pact.
Sounds like you are covered from a functional testing side on the prover which is good. What tool are you using for the provider testing out of interest
yousafn
2022-05-09 10:34
How are you ensuring conformance to the swagger spec? Is it generated as code output
chris.williams
2022-05-09 10:35
API validation on the request, API validation on the response(s) in the tests
chris.williams
2022-05-09 10:36
It doesn't check that for things that are documented in the spec but not tested for - I never worked out how to write a code-coverage part for that
yousafn
2022-05-09 10:36
Thanks for sharing mate, appreciate that, looking forward to reading with a coffee shortly
chris.williams
2022-05-09 10:39
Another question, if I may, in the video demo a couple of weeks ago, it mentioned that the OpenAPI file is uploaded to Pactflow (which makes sense) and that the Postman test results are also uploaded - is there a generic format, or additional formats, that those test files could be in?
chris.williams
2022-05-09 10:43
I got to this, as we are currently using CDCT, and looking at if the move to BDCT brings benefits - I would recommend a "Migrating from one to the other" document, highlighting what it will do and what it won't do :+1:
yousafn
2022-05-09 10:49
Thanks man, for the really good insight
? I'm not sure we would ever advocate migrating from CDCT to BDCT, but
? would definitely suggest using BDCT for coverage of services CDCT is not suited for,
? would definitely suggest moving to CDCT from BDCT, where BDCT was used as a tool to get initial organisation buy-in / support for contract testing in general, and you can move to CDCT for stronger guarantees
So definitely see a hybrid model working or a BDCT -> CDCT (So you've dipped your toe in the contract testing water, and now you want to get wet!)
I am going to assume you've seen these two sections
? https://docs.pactflow.io/docs/bi-directional-contract-testing#use-cases
? https://docs.pactflow.io/docs/bi-directional-contract-testing#comparison-to-pact
Lastly, whilst I've got your attention man, what type of format do you prefer, (docs, examples. videos. repos, blog?) thanks again
chris.williams
2022-05-09 10:51
> ? I'm not sure we would ever advocate migrating from CDCT to BDCT, but
Worth thinking about how the advertising/promo for this is in the pre-launch material - it went out to all the current users as "here's the next big thing.." :slightly_smiling_face:
yousafn
2022-05-09 10:52
Ask away dude
Can be any content with a valid mime type, we have examples that just send a bool `true/false`
https://docs.pactflow.io/docs/bi-directional-contract-testing/contracts/oas#request-details
> ? `verificationResults.content`
> ? The base64 encoded test results, which may be any output of your choosing (see https://docs.pactflow.io/docs/bi-directional-contract-testing/contracts/oas#base64-encoding below).
> ? `verificationResults.contentType`
> ? The content type of the results. Must be a valid mime type
yousafn
2022-05-09 10:54
It is massive for current users, because if they are using CDCT and getting benefits, they will want to use it everywhere (and that causes everyone pain - maintainers, community supporters, users).
We have a guide of what Pact isn't good for, and BDCT helps address many of these pains. These docs will be linked in with all the advertising material, and we were quite clear that BDCT does replace nor reduce our :heart: for CDCT, but rather compliments ours users needs and workflows.
Really good food for thought
chris.williams
2022-05-09 11:00
ok so `verificationResults.content` can be literally anything - and it's just rendered in pactflow - gottcha
yousafn
2022-05-09 11:00
https://docs.pact.io/faq#what-is-pact-not-good-for
we love Pact (CDCT) but accept it doesn't solve everything :slightly_smiling_face:
Both docs sites are due a bit of a overhaul to help cement the overall messaging and help distinguish between BDCT/CDCT flows, and we are seeing users in the field beginning to ask some of the same questions around where and how they will use it, so I would hope over the course of the year we will be able to be really concrete.
Your feedback is invaluable though in helping work out where the gaps are!
yousafn
2022-05-09 11:01
we ask the user to send the name of the tool as well, so maybe if a particular tool is really popular we could have a nice renderer for the results, currently it's just rendered as plain text
chris.williams
2022-05-09 11:03
We like the product, but the docs are _hard work_ to read and find out how to build an end-to-end solution - there are a lot of examples that are somewhat light on real-world examples (like our aforementioned `200`/`401` example). Chunks of it feels like docs that are written by devs who obviously know a lot, but sometimes forget that people reading it don't :wink:
This is understandable, I've done it plenty of times :smile:
matt.fellows
2022-05-09 11:13
> Chunks of it feels like docs that are written by devs who obviously know a lot, but sometimes forget that people reading it don?t :wink:
We feel you! It?s one thing to know what good docs look like, it?s whole other thing to do it!
matt.fellows
2022-05-09 11:14
SmartBear has (had?) a big documentation team, but the current situation in Ukraine/Russia I believe has impacted this a lot. In any case, it?s definitely on the TODO and we?ll be working on a plan for this real soon after the initial integration work (Pactflow -> SmartBear, that is) has been completed
yousafn
2022-05-09 11:14
Yeah, the devs have been busy devvin'
They now have me to help free them up to help look after the community and help find out what you need, so the docs are well in my sights and I've had a rollercoaster going through them, so definitely keen to help reduce the cognitive load.
We have 401 failure cases in our CDCT examples, and it should be easy enough for me to add them into the BDCT examples.
Have you got any other possible real world examples that would help? I have long looked at and lusted after the gothinksters real world project https://github.com/gothinkster/realworld
chris.williams
2022-05-09 11:16
authentication failures was our first hurdle - we also have some endpoints where the response is different depending on the RBAC role of the user, but I think that would be covered by the OpenAPI comparison to the consumer mocks.
oscar.lopez
2022-05-10 21:09
Hi Guys! I just saw this great REST introduction tutorial https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLwy9Bnco-IpfZ72VQ7hce8GicVZs7nm0i
but now what I really need is another tutorial about Pact with Kafka Messages which explain this code
https://docs.pactflow.io/docs/examples/kafka/js/consumer/
(if is posible :slightly_smiling_face: )
yousafn
2022-05-13 10:18
How would people feel about guided issue templates when raising issues on our GH repos?
https://github.com/facebook/docusaurus/issues/new/choose
oscar.lopez
2022-05-13 21:30
Hi again I had a question? in this video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oPuHb9Rl8Zo
I could not get it at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oPuHb9Rl8Zo&t=1210s
So In the provider's contract tests is okay to Hardcode the data in order to satisfy a consumer contract but we need to create another functional test where the provider's handler output is the Hardcode mentioned before?
bethskurrie
2022-06-07 00:51
The Pact Broker API docs (outside of the HAL Browser) are woefully lacking. I would love this year to be the year we turn this around.
bethskurrie
2022-06-07 00:51
I?ve made a start on some auto generated markdown docs for some of the more popular endpoints.
bethskurrie
2022-06-07 00:51
I don?t see this as the final format - just the easiest thing I can do to get things started.
bethskurrie
2022-06-07 00:54
My approach is to have a test that generates a JSON fixture with an example of the request and response. This interaction data could then be post processed into anything we like. At the moment, I?ve just gone with markdown, but ideally we?d be able to support an OAS doc. I?m not sure if we?d go with a custom OAS and procedural verification, or an auto generated OAS.
bethskurrie
2022-06-07 00:55
Example documentation spec: https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact_broker/blob/master/spec/integration/pacticipants_documentation_spec.rb
matt.fellows
2022-06-07 03:24
Thanks Beth. This relates to the OSS miro we created the other day too. I?ll make sure it?s represented there too
yousafn
2022-06-08 17:21
added an integration to this channel: https://pact-foundation.slack.com/services/B03K70DU2BT
yousafn
2022-06-08 17:43
^ Testing out a new integration for a pact slack archive https://www.linen.dev/s/pact-foundation
It hasn't managed to get all the threads, and we aren't able to host under https://docs.pact.io/slack/ without going on to a paid tier so it might be a short trial
Here was an alternative we created will full open source tooling https://pact-slack.vercel.app/
edouard.lopez
2022-06-09 14:09
Do you have some example or guideline on how to handle a `DELETE` request from both consumer and provider side?
yousafn
2022-06-09 14:16
Looking across the pact-foundation, there is an example in this project
https://github.com/pactflow/example-siren/blob/24fabae041bb454c9c75726ea7cae5cec4b7632c/consumer/src/__tests__/delete-order.spec.js#L95-L102
https://github.com/pactflow/example-siren
We recently had a contributor reboot the example and add a couple of others, current WIP
https://github.com/pactflow/example-siren/pull/1
might be worth a quick :eyes:
edouard.lopez
2022-06-09 14:28
There is nothing in the provider, we want to test the `DELETE` request in an idempotent way, so me need a way to provide the resource id from the consumer or send it back from the provider
yousafn
2022-06-09 15:06
can you provide a quick sample of the endpoint you are trying to hit? or what you have tried so far, and I can have a nose.
just had a look at the project in more detail and there is no provider test code, another one for the list!
matt.fellows
2022-06-09 23:00
> Do you have some example or guideline on how to handle a `DELETE` request from both consumer and provider side?
why is this any different to to other requests? You would just have a state that says something like ?A user with ID 1234? exists for the delete use case, and the provider would ensure that such a user exists before the tests run
edouard.lopez
2022-06-10 09:25
Submitted a https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-jvm/pull/1571 to link to _Using provider states effectively_ page from JVM doc
edouard.lopez
2022-06-10 09:35
Am I correct to assume the mock consumer send the request during the `Execute Provider Test` step from the https://docs.pact.io/implementation_guides/go/readme#lifecycle-of-a-provider-verification diagram?
edouard.lopez
2022-06-10 10:21
Does the `uponReceiving` value need to be unique among a consumer test suite? It's not clear how it is used
matt.fellows
2022-06-10 10:37
Yes, usually the combination of the description (uponReceiving) and any states uniquely identify an interaction
edouard.lopez
2022-06-10 12:14
for the state I understand that's for the state handler, but I thought description was for humans. Moreover, are we talking of uniqueness from consumer PoV or provider?
matt.fellows
2022-06-10 12:33
It?s about identifying the interaction in a consumer test suite., but of course the provider will need to implement the state handlers at some point
greg.tyler
2022-06-14 08:00
https://github.com/pact-foundation/docs.pact.io/pull/151 for some example JSON formatting
b.1.alpha
2022-07-06 00:30
Trying to re-take the pact workshop https://docs.pactflow.io/docs/workshops/ci-cd/set-up-ci/configure-consumer-and-provider-pipelines
*without cleaning up the broker is causing some issues I suspect. Is there a way to reset a broker?
bethskurrie
2022-07-06 00:32
Yep. Go into the HAL browser (click the API button in the top right) and send a POST request to `/integrations`
b.1.alpha
2022-07-06 00:41
I did delete the pacts in the UI, then i deleted the integration in the UI. When i went to the HAL browser to look for anything left around, i found lots of stuff ie. pacticipants
bethskurrie
2022-07-06 00:55
it won?t delete secrets, because that?s a pactflow feature, and the endpoint in the oss code, so doesn?t know about secrets.
b.1.alpha
2022-07-06 00:59
my workshop provider build is failing in the test job with
```FAIL src/product/product.pact.test.js
? Pact Verification ? validates the expectations of ProductService
...
/home/runner/work/example-provider/example-provider/node_modules/@pact-foundation/pact-node/standalone/linux-x64-1.88.83/pact/lib/vendor/ruby/2.2.0/gems/pact-1.62.0/lib/pact/hal/entity.rb:102:in `assert_success!': Error retrieving https://b1alpha.pactflow.io/pacts/provider/pactflow-example-provider/for-verification status=404 (Pact::Hal::ErrorResponseReturned)```
b.1.alpha
2022-07-06 01:01
I have not got to a step in the workshop, where I would have configured anything other than the PACT_BROKER_BASE_URL
b.1.alpha
2022-07-06 01:02
its a fresh forked version of the example workshop repo, it is suppose to just pass at this point with only a the PACTFLOW_TOKEN_FOR_CI_CD_WORKSHOP setup in github
bethskurrie
2022-07-06 01:03
the provider application needs to exist in your pactflow account before you can run the verification step.
bethskurrie
2022-07-06 01:03
are you sure it?s meant to pass at that point? or is it just needing to run to prove it has connectivity?
b.1.alpha
2022-07-06 01:11
Might be worth giving the workshop a shot to reproduce. It?s the first step, fresh workshop repos, fresh broker.
bethskurrie
2022-07-06 01:12
from the 404 error, I can see that the provider does not exist in that account.
b.1.alpha
2022-07-06 01:15
I ran this a number of times, i must of deleted the pacts afterwards cleaning up. Thank you. Wow its EOD I am tripping out.
b.1.alpha
2022-07-06 17:48
We are using jvm pact.
Right now, the ?tag? deprecation is a little fuzzy. We are looking at the can-i-deploy docs https://docs.pact.io/pact_broker/can_i_deploy#using-can-i-deploy-with-tags
Specifically:
When using the `can-i-deploy` command in conjunction with tags, use the parameter `--to ENVIRONMENT` rather than `--to-environment ENVIRONMENT`.
Can we use can-i-deploy without the tags in java?
```to ENVIRONMENT```
b.1.alpha
2022-07-06 17:55
https://docs.pactflow.io/docs/workshops/ci-cd/workshop/prerequisite-concepts
```INFO
As of July 2021, recording deployments using the record-deployment command has just been released, and support for the corresponding selector { deployed: true } has not yet been added to all the Pact client libraries. The previous method of recording releases was to use tags. If you are not using one of the libraries that currently supports the { deployed: true} selector (currently Javscript and Ruby support it), you will need to use tags in the meantime as per the documentation in the Tags page.```
b.1.alpha
2022-07-06 18:01
Is there a reason we dont launch the webhook on the provider from our consumer directly, so we can wait for it to complete? Rather than asking pactflow to trigger webhooks? Seems like it would solve for this
b.1.alpha
2022-07-06 18:08
this being the way we have to have a failing state in the consumer, then observe the provider, then run the consumer again
b.1.alpha
2022-07-06 19:39
Okay so, even if tags is not supported in jvm, can we just move to new style using the dockerized pact-cli for all related things to pushing pacts?
``` image: pactfoundation/pact-cli:latest
stage: can-i-deploy
script:
- "pact-broker can-i-deploy
--pacticipant $APPLICATION_NAME
--version $CI_COMMIT_SHORT_SHA
# --to production OLD WAY
--to-environment production
--broker-base-url $PACT_BROKER_BASE_URL
--broker-token $PACT_BROKER_API_TOKEN"```
b.1.alpha
2022-07-06 19:41
Note: we cant use the pact-cli for
```stage: pact-verify```
because we dont want to launch a service to verify
bethskurrie
2022-07-06 22:07
you can wait for the provider?s tests to finish by using the polling feature of can-i-deploy.
bethskurrie
2022-07-06 22:08
The webhooks (especially tne new one) are more complex than just ?trigger a build?. You only need to trigger a build when the pact has changed, and you want to trigger multiple builds - one for each environment that the provider is deployed to, and one for the latest on the main branch.
matt.fellows
2022-07-07 03:45
You can do this, absolutely (I recommend using the CLI for all languages)
matt.fellows
2022-07-07 03:47
The state is that we are currently working through the branches and environments support across the key languages in the Pactflow engineering team. This includes updating all of the documentation, and the CI/CD workshops.
There are many places in which the work in progress is documented, so as it stands that is hard to consume as a user - we are looking at ways to improve this that take into account visibility for users, and simplicity for maintainers, and visibility on the work we?re doing in Pactflow.
That aside, i?ll try and answer your questions above.
matt.fellows
2022-07-07 03:48
The consideration here is tat you also need to be able to validate contracts using the `environment` or `branch` otherwise it won?t work
matt.fellows
2022-07-07 03:48
I believe you?re using Java, if so, I think Ron has completed most of the key scenarios for Java as at yesterday, except for Maven support and Junit4 (which is under consideration if it should be deprecated/retired)
matt.fellows
2022-07-07 03:52
> Is there a reason we dont launch the webhook on the provider from our consumer directly, so we can wait for it to complete? Rather than asking pactflow to trigger webhooks? Seems like it would solve for this
It?s not the common use case, but worth considering the situation where your provider also is a consumer of another provider?..and so on.
Personally (not a Pactflow viewpoint) I prefer my pipelines to be shorter, and fail in those kinds of cases, rather than wait indefinitely for something to happen or not happen.
b.1.alpha
2022-07-07 05:24
Right, we wanted to use the cli but for the verify step, however the service cant be launched easily, are we were running the unit tests instead. So we are running junit ya. As per https://pact-foundation.slack.com/archives/C9UN99H24/p1656029211999329?thread_ts=1656026236.477939&cid=C9UN99H24
b.1.alpha
2022-07-07 05:26
I will recommend to use the cli whenever possible as we go though (in our case mvn and junit5)
matt.fellows
2022-07-07 05:37
totally. I?d be going JUnit5 myself also as it?s much nicer (you have access to the service in a unit test context, so can simply/easily mock services, change state etc.)
matt.fellows
2022-07-07 05:38
So I should clarify the above statement. For testing, I?d use the library that integrates most closely with your code (e.g. JUnit for Java, jest-pact for Jest in JS etc.).
For non-testing activities like publishing pacts, can I deploy checks etc., use the CLI.
bethskurrie
2022-07-07 07:13
typically, you shouldn?t need the wait option, because the recommended workflow is to do all the changes to the consumer contract on a branch (if you use branches) so that by the time you merge, the contract is already ?pre-verified? and you don?t need to wait for another verification to run.
hui.supat
2022-07-25 13:35
Hi everyone, I was looking for a solution with PACT, database stuffs (sql/nosql) and message streaming platform like kafka, and get redirect to this forum.
could you let me know that are there any attempts/poc/conceptual or conclusion/assumption that relavant on those items above?
Thanks!
matt.fellows
2022-07-26 03:18
Welcome! Can you please elaborate on what your needs are? Perhaps start with the scenario you are looking to test and we can advise
matt.fellows
2022-07-26 03:19
For Kafka support, you might start with reading https://docs.pact.io/getting_started/how_pact_works#non-http-testing-message-pact and https://docs.pact.io/recipes/kafka and looking at the examples (howtoexamples)
matt.fellows
2022-07-26 03:19
This is an example of testing Dynamo with Pact: https://dius-au.medium.com/contract-testing-serverless-and-asynchronous-applications-part-2-76b5576c789e
matt.fellows
2022-07-26 03:20
But as a general rule, database testing is not something you would test with Pact
jgfarias42
2022-07-27 13:26
Hi folks,
Katacode has shutdown.
Do we have an alternative platform where we can share this documentation?
mike.geeves064
2022-07-27 13:35
I'm not sure how far it's progressed, but there was some work done with Killercoda: https://killercoda.com/pactflow
yousafn
2022-07-27 13:48
Hey,
Should be good to go on Killercoda, the website was updated to point to the new links
https://docs.pactflow.io/docs/tutorials/#bi-directional-contract-testing
bethskurrie
2022-08-18 06:28
Hey @yousafn do we have any meaningful data we can view from the ?is this page useful?? widget?
bethskurrie
2022-08-18 07:19
Btw, I?ve updated https://docs.pact.io/provider/recommended_configuration with docs for branches and environments. The old info was killing me.
sushant.soni
2022-08-18 08:56
On this page - https://docs.pact.io/implementation_guides/javascript/docs/provider
The hyperlink in the screenshot is broken, I want to set the logLevel environment variable, may I know what is it or where can I find it?
matt.fellows
2022-08-18 09:05
I think that property is actually now supported and accepts what it did previously. Can you please raise an issue on the pact JS GitHub page?
sushant.soni
2022-08-18 09:08
I am using this version `@pact-foundation/pact": "^9.16.4`, and the `logLevel` doesn't seem to be working irrespective of the value set.
yousafn
2022-08-18 11:31
Yay! Thanks dudette! :yellow_heart:
I need to set some time aside to jump on these
https://github.com/pact-foundation/docs.pact.io/issues/136
including the CI/CD workshop.
yousafn
2022-08-18 11:40
This is from the http://docs.pactflow.io, a value of 1 means someone selected useful. so an av value of 1 means the page was useful to all voters
a couple of the negative entries are mine for testing when I first implemented it.
yousafn
2022-08-25 15:22
76 events, so not a huge sample base, but can infer a couple of things
3 people disliked this https://docs.pact.io/implementation_guides/jvm/consumer/kotlin
is it any surprise - it's empty
5 minute getting started guide got 6 votes, and 1 like https://docs.pact.io/5-minute-getting-started-guide which may be down to the REPL's and not being able to get access to the full source code, or maybe people are expecting to find out how to get started on their machines. (setup guide)
yousafn
2022-08-26 00:36
I wonder if it?s missed as it?s in the footer - have people lost the will, or do they just not get to it, as they are deep linked into part way down a page to an anchor
If we have a call to action near the top that wasn?t too intrusive that said, we are working hard to improve these docs, click on the voting button to let us know. Need more help? ( link to ask for help )
Or could we be more free form with an annoying clippy style chat pop up.
I?ve not checked the search stats in a while to see what the hot topics are so that is also a reminder
bethskurrie
2022-08-26 04:28
it is easy to miss. i was looking for it, and I didn?t notice it for a while because it looked like it was a footer.
david342
2022-09-08 13:41
So Pact won't support cases where a response has objects with EITHER an empty list or a list of length > 0. I cannot believe this isn't allowable , its a total deal breaker for using what is a great service. Great shame.
yousafn
2022-09-08 13:46
What happens in the case where your provider returns only empty lists and your validation passes and never returns a list greater than 0, and therefore cannot validator the object structure of a list with contents in it
david342
2022-09-08 13:47
You have a matcher that says its empty = OK or its got the objects I defined ? I don't see why thats a problem
yousafn
2022-09-08 13:49
and therefore the list with contents might not match the consumers expectation
david342
2022-09-08 13:51
They can all be empty , they can all be length > 0 or either ? I think we are miscommunicating. Anyway its a big impediment to us using the framework /PactFlow so your team seem fixed on this approach. Maybe I am misunderstanding something but it doesn't seem like a good approach and doesn't allow us to use this.
david342
2022-09-08 13:52
I cannot test with provider states as the response has objects with empty lists and objects with populated lists , writing a test for each would fail ?
yousafn
2022-09-08 13:57
Hmm, maybe we are :slightly_smiling_face: This is what I am thinking, rather than having one test
Given there are no products (setup state to return empty list)
When I make a request to get all products
Then I am returned an empty list
Given there are products (setup state to return populated list)
When I make a request to get all products
Then I am returned a list
yousafn
2022-09-08 14:00
If you can provide a concrete example of your issue you are facing, we can look to suggest a way forward if you want
david342
2022-09-08 14:01
Thanks for you help but perhaps I am not explaining the scenario correctly API response
[
{
"type": "parent",
"children": [] #no children
},
{
"type": "parent"
"children" :[{"name": "Buzz"}..... ] # children
},
.....
]
yousafn
2022-09-08 14:09
So if you had support for optional, during the pact verification you could get a result like
```[
{
"type": "parent",
"children": [] #no children
},
{
"type": "parent"
"children" :[] #no children
},
.....
]```
and your test would pass, and you would be safe to deploy.
however your provider, when it has children could actually return a different structure than you expected for the list with children, and you wouldn?t know until it was too late?
```[
{
"type": "parent",
"children": [] #no children
},
{
"type": "parent"
"children" :[{"firstName": "Buzz"}..... ] # children
},
.....
]```
david342
2022-09-08 14:14
OK I see. What I was asking is can a matcher be implemented to verify an empty list or an object(s) like the one in the response but only that shape ? It appears not . I prefer to say either not optional , either no objects or the ones of a shape I define. Either one state or another, there's only two states. Like Enum isn't optional its one of a list of string s, does that make sense ?
david342
2022-09-08 14:21
I mean if developers cannot validate a response with this kind of structure Pact is very limited in its use , don't you think ? Unless there is a way to restructure the response without sacrificing payload size or simplicity.
david342
2022-09-08 14:41
OK I'll stop now just to say , this isn't an optional field , its there but in two different states. Thanks for your help, I really expected for a paid for service this stuff would be covered off. Thankfully we are on a 14 day trail.
yousafn
2022-09-08 15:24
> I mean if developers cannot validate a response with this kind of structure Pact is very limited in its use , don?t you think ?
I don?t no, you can use provider states for this purpose.
> I really expected for a paid for service this stuff would be covered off.
You?re asking for a fundamental change in a project, which has associated documentation to explain the rationale, so why would you assume that this would be covered?
yousafn
2022-09-08 15:27
I?ll take some time to digest this, when I am free, pretty chocka today :thumbsup:
> What I was asking is can a matcher be implemented to verify an empty list or an object(s) like the one in the response but only that shape ? It appears not . I prefer to say either not optional , either no objects or the ones of a shape I define. Either one state or another, there?s only two states. Like Enum isn?t optional its one of a list of string s, does that make sense ?
yousafn
2022-09-08 15:35
If your provider documented in OpenAPI, you will be able to utilise cross-contract comparison, over the Pact Provider verification with matchers, which may ease the pain of building your matchers :slightly_smiling_face:
david342
2022-09-08 15:38
Thanks is this part of the bidirectional testing approach here https://docs.pactflow.io/docs/bi-directional-contract-testing/ or can you send a link for me to find out more . Thanks for taking time out to assist me
yousafn
2022-09-08 15:40
yeah that is the one chap, you still utilise your existing pact contracts generated on the consumer side, and for the provider you upload an oas spec, plus verification results to show that the provider implements the specification.
https://docs.pactflow.io/docs/bi-directional-contract-testing/contracts/oas#publishing-the-provider-contract--results-to-pactflow
You can start with a plain text file or upload the OAS as the verification result file to get started quickly :)
yousafn
2022-09-08 15:41
And no worries, sorry to hear you are frustrated! We certainly want to help ease your pain, but sometimes even the strongest of wills must bend to the tool :raised_hands:
matt.fellows
2022-09-09 00:47
The idea of Pact tests is that you can control the data coming back from your provider.
Another option to test what you?re after is to do something like this:
```[
{
"type": "parentwithnochildrcen",
"children": [] #no children
},
{
"type": "parentwithchildren",
"children" :eachLike({"firstName": "Buzz"}) # children
}
]```
This would not match an arbitrary length array, but again, if you can control the data you now have tested both cases in a single test.
If you can?t use provider states as Yousaf says, the `arrayContaining` matcher in JS might do what you need. It would allow you to specify multiple different object shapes, and would ensure the provider returns an array that at least has both of them. This is not yet available in Python though, which if I recall, is what you need
david342
2022-09-09 09:17
Thanks for all you help. if you have a moment and I know I have used alot of your time already , I see atLeastLike in the js version , this allows setting of the min length , would this allow an empty array (min=0) ?
matt.fellows
2022-09-11 23:00
Should https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact_broker/wiki/Terminology#pre-verification be moved somewhere into our docs (and if so, where do we think is most appropriate)? The question has come up a few times recently
naf
2022-10-14 11:01
On the video on this page, https://pactflow.io/bi-directional-contract-testing/, it seems impossible to click on the other thumbnails (on the strip on the bottom, when pausing, or at the end of the video). Also, it seems impossible to click on the share button. Clicking anywhere just pauses the video. I?ve tried in a few browsers.
naf
2022-10-17 17:34
In this video, https://youtu.be/a9K43CHSRM0?t=1351, there is a pointer to http://docs.pactflow.io/docs/examples, that indicates there should be a section for bi-directional contract testing. I can?t find these examples anywhere on the site. Anyone @here find them?
yousafn
2022-10-17 18:54
there is a table with a list of them marked as use case OpenAPI, or under the bi directional contract testing link on the left hand side nav bar
matt.fellows
2022-10-18 01:28
Yeah, that?s a bit weird. Something might be conflicting with the controls on the page, thanks for raising
naf
2022-10-18 12:05
@yousafn Thank you. Somehow, for days, I was seeing the old docs site (with completely different navigation), which is why I couldn?t find it. At some point yesterday, I reloaded the page, and saw the new site. Wacky, I know.
hazem
2022-11-18 19:37
Hello - question about consumer contacts and drift. It's quite easy for a consumer to define a contract, but how can we easily keep the contract up-to-date and not drift away from the actual consumption of the api.
For example, a frontend may define a contract with an backend API, but use only a limited amount from either the request or even more likely the response.
The initial contract definition is minimal as we dont want to overstate how we consume the API, however, as the frontend changes and consumes more fields from the backend's api response, how can we be deliberate enough to always make sure the contract is up-to-date.
Are there any well defined patterns for this that someone can point out? In my case the frontend is React, but happy to review any pattern for this. Thanks in advance
matt.fellows
2022-11-21 06:58
> The initial contract definition is minimal as we dont want to overstate how we consume the API, however, as the frontend changes and consumes more fields from the backend?s api response, how can we be deliberate enough to always make sure the contract is up-to-date.
If the consumer needs more fields from the response than they have defined in the contract, it should show up in the consumer test, as it should be a unit test of your API client. Any missing fields will not be present, and hopefully that should get picked up in that test.
It?s harder to detect the reverse of this, obviously.
hazem
2022-11-22 17:15
Correct, but is there a pattern to use to have consumer's implementation of the client be kept in sync with consumer tests?
matt.fellows
2022-11-22 23:11
I guess the answer is in how you would write a unit test. If the implementation is changing, and the unit test continues to pass either:
1. It was a bad unit test and would pass in most conditions
2. OR (hopefully) the unit test is only testing the observable behaviour that matters
It _should_ fail if its use of a downstream API usage changes, based on the observable behaviour of the unit under test, and the Pact test setup (i.e. the mock) wasn?t adjusted accordingly.
yousafn
2022-12-09 17:10
I do love the power of open source.
We use Facebooks docusaurus to generate our site documentation and it seems useful to have code tabs showing the relevant snippets for each applicable language, given Pact is multi language.
This feature request we made back in Mar has just got merged and will make our code snippets dreamier
https://github.com/facebook/docusaurus/issues/7008#issue-1181303022
As we should be able to link to a specific doc page, and then drill down to the relevant code section for the language you need.
So we could re-use the same url for say consumer version selectors in each repo passing a language param, and it takes you to exactly what you need, code wise, with all the generic preamble that surrounds the feature but isn?t worth duplicating in each repos respective readmes
guillaume.camus
2022-12-21 12:21
Hi folks, I looking for article, blog... That explains the difference between a schema (like graphQL, grpc, avro ...) and a contract.
Because each time I propose to setup Pact, teams answer me, it's not necessary we used graphQL.
But for me, it's not the same. It's complementary.
I'm searching arguments to convince them.
jaswanth.ooty
2022-12-21 12:43
Hey @guillaume.camus :wave:
I don't have a direct answer for specifications like GraphQL, etc, but here is a `convince me` section that talks about OpenAPI. hope this helps. ta!
https://docs.pact.io/faq/convinceme#but-i-use-swaggeropenapi
edouard.lopez
2023-01-09 11:43
https://pact-foundation.slack.com/archives/C9VPNUJR2/p1673264400729179?thread_ts=1672929089.066079&cid=C9VPNUJR2 the `buildUrl` / `--build-url` option I search on https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-ruby-standalone repo to no avail. I was expecting the standalone project to have this information too. Am I misunderstanding that `pact-ruby-standalone` include feature from https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact_broker-client?
matt.fellows
2023-01-09 11:54
The standalone project really just pulls in other packages into an executable
edouard.lopez
2023-01-09 17:39
The release page doesn't include any installation instructions, despite what the readme state, and there is no doc about `pact-broker`.
I'm creating a MR to update the readme
matt.fellows
2023-01-09 22:23
Thanks, you?re right. I wonder why it was removed.
I?ll leave that for another maintainer to review
david342
2023-01-13 13:49
I have generated a consumer contract using Pact and uploaded to PactFlow, could someone point me in the direction of how to verify this consumer contract using a Python lambda function ? I see examples for Express and similar in Python but how do I undertake a producer test for a AWS Lambda function ? I am a bit baffled and cannot see any clear examples ?
mike.geeves064
2023-01-13 15:08
Have you seen the examples in the pact-python repo? There isn't one specifically for AWS Lambda, but the FastAPI and Flask examples should demonstrate the same principles: https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-python/tree/master/examples
bethskurrie
2023-01-19 23:48
:pact-open-link: :pact-open-link: :pact-open-link: :pact-open-link:
The docs sync from the pact library markdown files to http://docs.pact.io is fixed again. Apologies for the interruption to this service :laughing: GitHub decided my account was compromised for some reason and disabled my account and all the tokens at the end of last year. The tokens are now re-generated and updated.
:pact-open-link: :pact-open-link: :pact-open-link: :pact-open-link:
david342
2023-01-20 11:41
Hello , thanks for all you help with my questions , can anyone give me a working link to the guide to using Pact and SwaggerHub spec to create a consumer contract , the page in the Docs in https://docs.pactflow.io/docs/bi-directional-contract-testing/tools/swaggerhub/ , the link in section 4.2 Test our Consumer is broken . Thanks
yousafn
2023-01-20 16:10
You just create a consumer test in the regular way with Pact or an adapter
https://docs.pactflow.io/docs/bi-directional-contract-testing/consumer/
Thanks for the heads up on broken link, this is where it is pointing to
vietanhtran.dev
2023-02-16 03:59
Hey team, from reading the pact broker cli, we are using `--build-url` when calling `pact-broker publish` but it doesn?t really show anything on Pactflow UI so wonder what it is actually for? It would be great if it shows on UI too. Atm, I am just adding it as a tag. Thanks :+1:
matt.fellows
2023-02-16 05:10
I believe we plan on adding it into the next version of our UI, but thanks for asking. I?ve added it to our feature backlog as a request in any case
gsouza
2023-02-23 20:23
hey all!
Based on this doc https://docs.pactflow.io/docs/workshops/ci-cd there is two main repository:
? https://github.com/pactflow/example-consumer
? https://github.com/pactflow/example-provider
I must do the same If I want to apply for my application ? I mean, do I need to create a repo for consumer e other for provider?
thanks!
matt.fellows
2023-02-24 03:08
Are you asking if you should have two separate repositories for your applications to do contract testing, or just to run the workshop?
gsouza
2023-02-24 13:43
actually both, i mean, i didn't get why we have to separate them, is it possible to create two yml file?
matt.fellows
2023-02-24 22:31
I?m sorry I?m struggling to understand the question/issue.
What are you trying to do?
Most applications are in their own repository (i.e. not a monorepo), so we have created our workshops to mirror that.
Each application would normally have its own CI/CD pipeline independent from others. In these examples, both use GitHub Actions.
gsouza
2023-02-24 22:59
My point is that did you created those two repo only for this workshop? I mean, do i have to do the same or I can use one single yml file which contains the consumer test and provider test....
matt.fellows
2023-02-24 23:43
Yes these are for demonstration purposes. If your consumer and provider are in the same repo you can do that.
sushant.soni
2023-02-27 11:05
I believe the information https://docs.pact.io/getting_started/terminology#pact-specification is a bit incorrect.
```The current version of the specification is 3.0 for the JVM implementation, and 2.0 for all others.```
`pact-js` also supports V3 now.
matt.fellows
2023-02-27 11:22
Thanks - good spot. I?ve just corrected that and updated the feature table (and linked to it). Should be fixed in ~5 mins (deploy will take a few mins)
erik.haartmans
2023-02-27 16:16
Hi here,
What's the best way to handle a provider which has no consumers yet, but you still want to implement the pact flow into the ci?
It will return saying `Could not load pacts` (which can be turned into a warning) or it will say `No pacts or verifications have been published for version ... of ...`
matt.fellows
2023-02-28 02:04
It's probably language specific, which language are you using? Best asking in that specific channel
egrep
2023-02-28 08:17
Hi,
I am sorry to ask here, but it seems I didn?t find the answer to my question in the documentation.
Which is an ideomatic response from `provide_state` endpoint on provider? How is this response to be used next? In many of the examples and real world project I?ve seen, it returns simply JSON `{ "result": state }` . And I was wondering what benefit I could get from configuring this response?
matt.fellows
2023-02-28 10:18
The state needn't return anything, an HTTP 200 is all that is actually needed.
The main thing is it should mutate your provider to allow the scenario to work.
gsouza
2023-02-28 18:45
hey @matt.fellows sorry but i have another questions, do i need to follow those steps:
? run the Consumer Tests
? publish the pact files at https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact_broker
? run the Provider verification
I mean, to fully do the consumer-driven contract testing i have to follow those steps, correct?
gsouza
2023-02-28 20:57
i'm asking that because i'm getting failed results after run the provider so i believe i have to publish the pacts before run the provider, is that correct?!
matt.fellows
2023-02-28 23:26
Yes, you should publish the pacts (otherwise you won?t be able to publish verification results back to PactFlow/Broker)
matt.fellows
2023-02-28 23:26
but the issue you have there is unrelated to that, it?s failing because your provider is unable to verify the contract
egrep
2023-03-01 06:26
Python one love :slightly_smiling_face: However, we have a huge number of projects in PHP and JS, so I guess I have to deal with that too
matt.fellows
2023-03-01 11:26
We really don?t explain that endpoint very well, I?ll make a note of that for dealing with tomorrow
matt.fellows
2023-03-01 11:27
With JS, it?s all wrapped up in the JS DSL so it?s much nicer. It just looks like a native JS function
gsouza
2023-03-01 14:09
hey @matt.fellows I'm still debugging those failing tests!
you said "your provider is unable to verify the contract" i reviewed my consumer.spec and my service as well and they looks good, just to be sure about the steps:
1 - after run the consumer tests
2 - json files will be generated at pacts folder
3 - provider tests will grab those json files to verify them
is that correct or i'm forgetting something?
matt.fellows
2023-03-02 13:07
Yes, albeit you usually would publish them to a broker and verify from a broker. Bits it's ok to do without
matt.fellows
2023-03-02 13:08
The failure above shows your provider is returning a 401 but was expecting a 200
2023-03-02 13:08
Here are a number of useful hands-on labs that teach all of the key concepts: https://docs.pactflow.io/docs/workshops and https://docs.pact.io/implementation_guides/workshops
matt.fellows
2023-03-02 13:09
There's a JS workshop that talks about how to test auth there that might help
gsouza
2023-03-02 16:50
I don't know the reason to return 401 since i'm looking at the pacts folder, however i'll publish then run the provider checking the pacts from brokerurl
gsouza
2023-03-02 18:44
without a broker i can simple point to the pacts folder using:
``` pactUrls: [
path.resolve(
process.cwd(),
'./pacts/mySoncumerFile.json'
),
]```
matt.fellows
2023-03-02 23:15
the `401` is coming from *your* provider API. I?m guessing there is an authentication layer on it, and the pact request is getting caught in it
yousafn
2023-03-15 14:59
Hey all :ralph-wave:
Verbose logging, you don't know you need it, until you need it!
And you really don't want to go digging around the docs for it. It is one of the most valuable things for maintainers/community members when trying to assist users with issues.
Know how to do it, in the Pact library you use?
Why not help us document it in a single place, for other users, or let us know how best to present a feature/option in all client libraries, to you (as ultimately we would like to expand this idea out to all pact features)
https://github.com/pact-foundation/docs.pact.io/issues/237
Thanks for any help in advance :happy-hearts:
jgfarias42
2023-03-27 14:10
404 on "https://docs.pactflow.io/docs/bi-directional-contract-testing/provider/contracts/oas#publishing-the-provider-contract--results-to-pactflow"
Hi folks,
On the page Provider Testing Guide [1], we have a link for a page with details
about publishing the OpenAPI specs, but it is broken [2].
1 - https://docs.pactflow.io/docs/bi-directional-contract-testing/provider/#step-4-publish-your-provider-contract-and-verification-results
2 - https://docs.pactflow.io/docs/bi-directional-contract-testing/provider/contracts/oas#publishing-the-provider-contract--results-to-pactflow
yousafn
2023-03-27 14:21
Thanks, it's odd, the relative url resolved in some cases, depending on which anchored hyperlink, I've set it to the full url now so it should resolve in all cases,
Thanks for raising @jgfarias42 just popped a fix in
matt.fellows
2023-03-27 21:49
Docusaurus is supposed to detect broken links like this, it?s surprising to me we keep getting these :thinking_face:
adam.witko
2023-06-19 10:39
Hey, does anyone know if there is documentation on consumer and provider naming best practices? I'm not looking for format of the name but more the level in which you describe the consumer and provider. For example, in a monorepo with N services deployed, is it each 'service' that may be a consumer? Is it the abstractions within each of those services (maybe they are shared in a reusable package?) ? Then on the provider side, if you have an API that is a proxy to several 'provider' services, should then provider name be the API or each individual service? Thanks if you can help
adam.witko
2023-06-19 10:41
I was looking at https://docs.pact.io/getting_started/terminology.
From this the Service Consumer seems to talk at the application level and not any abstraction in the code or a shared package used through multiple services.
The Service Provider seems to hint it's the API that's the provider which may have multiple deployed units behind it (so in my question previously, these are the individual services).
grnmeadow7
2023-08-29 03:32
Hello, does anyone know if there is a documentation on pact test connecting to an external mock server such as mockoon or postman?
grnmeadow7
2023-08-29 03:49
instead of using an internal mockserver, i need to connect to mockoon mockserver. All my API concepts are in there.
```@Test
@PactTestFor(pactMethod = "singleProduct")
void testSingleProduct(MockServer mockServer) {
productServiceClient.setBaseUrl(mockServer.getUrl());
Product product = productServiceClient.getProductById(10L);
assertThat(product, is(equals(new Product(10L, "28 Degrees", "CREDIT_CARD", "v1", "CC_001"))));
}```
grnmeadow7
2023-08-29 03:52
correct me if i am http://wrong.it seems that i need to have a working api service before i can use this pact test
matt.fellows
2023-08-29 04:27
No, pact provides a mock service. You can't use external mocks in pact consumer tests
