1970-01-01 00:25
A file, which can't be shown because your team is past the free storage limit, was commented on.
1970-01-01 00:25
A file, which can't be shown because your team is past the free storage limit, was commented on.
matt
2017-02-19 23:59
For those wanting to invite colleagues etc., you can refer them to http://pact-broker-slack-invite.herokuapp.com/ so they can signup instantly
timbailey
2017-02-28 22:07
I assume that its a manual process to publish pacts to the broker (i'm in Pact-JS land)....
timbailey
2017-02-28 22:08
I think I've answered my own question....in the consumer as that is where the pacts are generated.....
matt
2017-02-28 22:10
You can publish from your consumer code either in JS: https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-js#publishing-pacts-to-a-broker or manually via the API (https://github.com/bethesque/pact_broker/wiki/Publishing-and-retrieving-pacts)
timbailey
2017-02-28 22:14
Right, so does it make sense to publish on the finalize promise?
``` apiProvider.finalize()
.then(() => {
console.log('Writing PACT files') <-------Publish code goes here?
done()
})
.catch(err => {
console.error('Error writing PACT files')
done.fail(err)
})```
matt
2017-02-28 22:15
you probably don?t want your devs pushing changes on each unit test run, as this then provides an obligation to the Provider service (might be the same person/team) to meet that contract. Better to control that more carefully
matt
2017-02-28 22:16
also, you might want to tag the pacts (e.g. ?dev? or ?prod?) so that you can differentiate testing activities on the provider side
matt
2017-02-28 22:16
it might be OK for the provider to break a ?dev? tagged pact, but definitely not a ?prod? one
matt
2017-02-28 22:20
or at least, not directly. We are looking at creating pluggable protocol engines. But this is probably a while away. We?d need to look at compatibility with other Pact language implementations etc.
timbailey
2017-02-28 22:21
ok, so once your had the HTTP plugin....should be straigntforward to create GRPC imp also
timbailey
2017-02-28 23:24
Soooo, me again, we love the HTTP Consumer Driven Contracts stuff that exists now.... we would like to use it with that and GRPC and RabbitMQ (as these are the transports we'll be using)
matt
2017-02-28 23:25
Where are you based @timbailey? Perhaps we could organise a face to face / hangouts or something to work through it? Comminuty contributors would be great
timbailey
2017-02-28 23:27
but i'd probably need to ready through the code to see where the plugins might interact. Perhaps start with some pointers for me to read? Then we could hangout?
timbailey
2017-02-28 23:29
For me, could be full time.....but boss might fall over if I say "6 months"!!
matt
2017-02-28 23:29
There are a number of different approaches, ranging from ?t& actical band-aids" to ?the one true solution"
timbailey
2017-03-01 04:21
hmm, forked and `npm dist` creates the same pact.web.js without the .setup() method....must eb missing somthing else
timbailey
2017-03-01 04:30
Yep, my fault. I'm using the Karma-Pact plugin, which does not have a .setup() method
matt
2017-03-01 05:23
@timbailey yep, as Karma runs in the browser it can?t spawn open the mock service. I?m going to be looking at that in the next week or two, and probably rename it to `pact-web` or something for other web-browser-based testing frameworks
timbailey
2017-03-01 05:24
Cool, i'm having other wierd issues....tests all pass but I see incomplete calls to the http://127.0.0.1:8989/interactions/verification endpoint
matt
2017-03-01 05:25
If you have new interactions registered per test, you might need to clear out expectations between them with `removeInteractions ()`. Otherwise, each `verify()` is expecting all previous expectations to be met. The log file is your friend here.
matt
2017-03-01 05:26
ah ok, that?s fine. Each time you call `verify()` though you must have hit all of the endpoints you registered up until that point.
matt
2017-03-01 05:27
Either that, or move `verify()` into an `after()` type block that just runs once after all of the `it()` blocks pass
timbailey
2017-03-01 05:28
@timbailey uploaded a file: https://pact-foundation.slack.com/files/UB7B76EE4/FB7R4HJS0/pasted_image_at_2017_03_01_04_28_pm_png
timbailey
2017-03-01 05:36
I have 2 test blocks, eachs adds interaction, does the test and then verifies
timbailey
2017-03-01 06:00
I have to disable singleRun, run it in Chrome, then enable the devTools, then on the network tab click F5
timbailey
2017-03-01 06:01
But becuase I'm doing that the interactions are "accumulating" on the server, and the call to `http://localhost:1234/unfriendMe` then 500's with a "Multiple interactions found" error
timbailey
2017-03-01 06:06
``` it("returns an error message", function (done) {
//Run the tests
client.unfriendMe().then(function() {
done(new Error('expected request to /unfriend me to fail'))
}, function(e) {
done()
})
})```
timbailey
2017-03-01 06:06
Here the test wants an error, which does happen, but not the error that the service should raise. Its a PACT mock error
timbailey
2017-03-01 06:08
I'd imagine that it should be poosible to have the same url registered for different states?
abubics
2017-03-01 06:10
for each interaction/scenario, you would define your expected state and response, so for one test you'd expect only one interaction
abubics
2017-03-01 06:11
can you not have your dev console open in Chrome before you start running your test?
timbailey
2017-03-01 06:12
This fixes the passing tests....
```
it("returns an error message", function (done) {
//Run the tests
client.unfriendMe()
.then(() => {
done(new Error('expected request to /unfriend me to fail'))
})
.catch(e => {
expect(e.status).toEqual(404)
done()
})
})```
timbailey
2017-03-01 06:14
The refresh issue was a red herring. So now even if I refresh I see the correct results from the test
timbailey
2017-03-01 21:20
`const req = this._request` to `const req = new window.XMLHttpRequest()` then the calls dont get cancelled....but they instead 500 error
timbailey
2017-03-01 21:21
```Actual interactions do not match expected interactions for mock MockService.
Missing requests:
GET /friends?age=30&children=Mary+Jane&children=James
See /home/tim/Projects/timbailey-pnk/pact-js/logs/mockserver-integration.log for details.```
timbailey
2017-03-01 21:25
Fixed it...if I move the provider.verify() to the `afterAll`
``` afterAll(function (done) {
provider.verify()
provider.finalize()
.then(function () { done() }, function (err) { done.fail(err) })
})```
timbailey
2017-03-01 21:26
Does that make sense? Seems to me like the tests are being run non-sequentially so that the verifies are failing as the interactions are being added "out of order"?
matt
2017-03-01 21:27
Great news (i think?). Are you able to past the structure of your tests with any important / sensitive stuff removed?
timbailey
2017-03-01 21:28
@timbailey uploaded a file: https://pact-foundation.slack.com/files/UB7B76EE4/FB7B7DHA4/client-spec_js
matt
2017-03-01 21:31
do you mind sharing the karma config so that I can compare notes? (assuming you?ve changed it for it to run in chrome, yeah?)
timbailey
2017-03-01 21:33
@timbailey uploaded a file: https://pact-foundation.slack.com/files/UB7B76EE4/FB8UKK0RL/karma_conf_js
matt
2017-03-01 21:46
So i?m no Karma expert, but it seems the tests all pass when you don?t run in debug. I?m probably fully catching up on your challenges, is this the case?
matt
2017-03-01 21:52
sorry I?m still confused though. The tests all pass for me (i.e. if I enable `singleRun` it all runs and I get an exit code of 0)
matt
2017-03-01 21:52
```
Chrome 56.0.2924 (Mac OS X 10.11.6): Executed 8 of 8 SUCCESS (2.079 secs / 0.025 secs)
02 03 2017 08:51:24.803:DEBUG [karma]: Run complete, exiting.
02 03 2017 08:51:24.805:DEBUG [launcher]: Disconnecting all browsers
02 03 2017 08:51:25.004:DEBUG [launcher]: Process Chrome exited with code 0
02 03 2017 08:51:25.004:DEBUG [temp-dir]: Cleaning temp dir /var/folders/2p/c2fzdtmx6837gcbf314_x5rm0000gn/T/karma-87724249
02 03 2017 08:51:25.029:DEBUG [launcher]: Finished all browsers
matt ~/development/public/pact-js ? echo $?
0
```
matt
2017-03-01 21:52
It?s only with the browser console open (devtools) that I get those cancelled requests
timbailey
2017-03-01 21:53
Yep, the tests succeed, the change I made was to resolve the cancelled requests
timbailey
2017-03-01 21:54
Yeah, so even with cancelled requests it passes, just feels ugly, so I was on a mission to track it down!
timbailey
2017-03-01 21:54
So I can fix the cancelled requests, but that means that I have to move the verification stuff to afterAll
matt
2017-03-01 21:55
it?s weird seeing that, I agree, but the calls are definitely coming in to the Ruby process to verify:
```
matt ~/development/public/pact-js ? tail -f logs/mockserver-integration.log | grep -i verif
I, [2017-03-02T08:53:58.789041 #37484] INFO -- : Verifying - interactions matched for example ""
I, [2017-03-02T08:54:09.463187 #37526] INFO -- : Verifying - interactions matched for example ""
I, [2017-03-02T08:54:09.486408 #37526] INFO -- : Verifying - interactions matched for example ""
I, [2017-03-02T08:54:09.507567 #37526] INFO -- : Verifying - interactions matched for example ??```
timbailey
2017-03-01 21:56
My guess is that the response is being sent and being read by chrome, but causes the "cancelled" to show as it reuses the XMLRequest object to start another request
matt
2017-03-01 22:02
I commented out the test body in the `should say hello` test so that it wouldn?t call the expected endpoint. The tests all still pass
matt
2017-03-01 22:35
ok getting it to fail was easy, looks like I?m assuming promises work the same here - clearly not
matt
2017-03-01 22:35
```
it("should say hello", function(done) {
//Run the tests
done()
// client.sayHello()
// .then(function (data) {
// expect(JSON.parse(data.responseText)).toEqual({ reply: "Hello" })
// done()
// })
// .catch(function (err) {
// done.fail(err)
// })
})
// verify with Pact, and reset expectations
it('successfully verifies', function(done) {
provider.verify()
.then(function(a) {
done()
}, function(e) {
throw e
})
})
})
```
timbailey
2017-03-02 00:21
Some kind of timing issues, rerunning the tests sometimes succeeds, sometimes fails 1 test
timbailey
2017-03-02 00:21
When it fails I see this in the verification call...
```Actual interactions do not match expected interactions for mock MockService.
Missing requests:
PUT /unfriendMe
See /home/tim/Projects/timbailey-pnk/pact-js/logs/mockserver-integration.log for details.```
timbailey
2017-03-02 00:22
I've tried various ways of trying to ensure the interactions are set, then the test is run, then the interactions are verified
timbailey
2017-03-02 01:09
Reorganised the test to make sure the requests to the mockServer are happening in the correct order. This for me is 4/4 passed
timbailey
2017-03-02 01:09
@timbailey uploaded a file: https://pact-foundation.slack.com/files/UB7B76EE4/FB7USUX2P/client-spec_js
matt
2017-03-02 01:27
That would explain the need for:
```
beforeAll(function (done) {
...
provider.removeInteractions()
```
matt
2017-03-02 01:28
because interactions from the last test (aka the `PUT /unfriendMe`) are still hanging around for the start of the next run
timbailey
2017-03-02 01:29
Perhaps you can send me the docs you were talkin gbaout yesterday regarding the "Plugable Protocol Engine", so I we can see whats going to be involved
matt
2017-03-02 01:30
ok there?s nothing yet on "Plugable Protocol Engine? but in terms of supporting other features in Pact i?d start at https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-specification/tree/version-3
matt
2017-03-02 01:35
gotta run man. Should we organise a call \ hangouts or something? Keen to hear more about what you?re doing and see what we can do?
timbailey
2017-03-02 01:37
Groovy, will read the docs and we can chat about what we trying to do and what we need
timbailey
2017-03-02 03:27
But it breaks the unit tests for the "Request" object. So will need to figure out how to test that
matt
2017-03-02 08:16
Thanks @timbailey, I?ve taken a look at the tests. I?m not sure it?s all necessary but I?ll look in more detail. I can see why we might want to create a new request each time
matt
2017-03-02 08:17
in the meanwhile, I?ve pushed up a small change to allow the `singleRun: false` scenario
timbailey
2017-03-02 20:57
Hi, The only way I could get the tests to be reliable was to closely control the requests going to the mockservice, seems like in Karma/Jasmine occasionally the tests would be run overlapped and this would cause the verify/removeinteractions to happen in the middle of the next test causing "missing interaction" errors
timbailey
2017-03-02 20:59
It is possible that by "fixing" the cancelled requests in Chrome I've then allowed the requests to overlap? ie The old way of reusing the same XMLHttpRequest actually enforces some kind of serialization of requests.....
thadir
2017-03-24 14:20
Goodday, thanks for letting us be part of the PACT Hosted Beta. Next week ill start implementing some of our pact test to go to the broker. I did have one question, at the moment we got err a realy technical user and password system from you will there be a more user friendly system. (I know now for the beta its fine and my team are for now the only ones that use it) but if were going to let the whole orgonisation and in the future also our clients use Pact it would be a nice to have to have a form of account magement in the pact broker website.
matt
2017-03-25 09:44
Hi @thadir, you?re most welcome! The short answer is yes, we are looking into other forms of authentication and access controls. But for now, and at least the few months, the system user is all we have.
thadir
2017-04-05 13:42
we have been playing around with the pact and were running in some issus about how the broker things versioning should be done. It seems it wants semantic version numbers. However we dont use that we use the date + hash of commit (for maser builds) and for pull request its <pull-request name> - build number-SNAPSHOT. Now it seems there is a mismatch. Any ideas I really don't want to introduce semantic versioning in our pipeline, because its weird for automated systems (only shared libraries get a semantic versioning in our system).
rholshausen
2017-04-06 05:18
@thadir I'm going to bounce this question to the Pact Broker main contributor, but my guess is that won't work at the moment.
beth
2017-04-06 23:26
@thadir You can write your own version parser - I made this configurable because I knew at some stage, people would want to use something other than semantic versioning. Let me throw together a page on the wiki, and I'll post the link.
beth
2017-04-06 23:41
Oh, looks like I already did. Great work, past Beth. https://github.com/bethesque/pact_broker/wiki/Configuration#version-parser
thadir
2017-04-07 07:43
@matt then we have a chalange there :wink:. For now we found a workaround. Becouse we realy want to use PACT but for its all good.
abe
2017-04-07 08:15
thx for granting access to the beta i look forward to getting my tests up and shared with the team :slightly_smiling_face:
abe
2017-04-07 12:39
curl -v -u 'user:pass' -XPUT \-H "Content-Type: application/json" -d@pact.json brokerURL
matt
2017-04-08 00:09
: Hi all, the OSS Pact Foundation team are conducting a short survey on Pact usage in order to improve the product and drive the roadmap. So far the feedback has been great and we have identified lots of pain points to addres. Please if you could spare 5 minutes, head over to https://goo.gl/JD5tuk - we?d _really_ appreciate it!
matt
2017-04-08 00:12
@abe are you following https://github.com/bethesque/pact_broker/wiki/Publishing-and-retrieving-pacts#publishing ?
fitzoh
2017-04-08 02:41
@thadir this was my stab at writing a custom versionomy parser (disclaimer: I don't know ruby at all)
``` def test_parsing_custom_snapshot_format
format_ = ::Versionomy.default_format.modified_copy do
field(:release_type, :default_value => :final, :requires_previous_field => false, :delimiter_regexp => '-') do
recognize_regexp(:development, 'SNAPSHOT', :development)
end
end
value1_ = ::Versionomy.parse('3.0.1-SNAPSHOT', format_)
assert_equal(3, value1_.major)
assert_equal(0, value1_.minor)
assert_equal(1, value1_.tiny)
assert_equal(:development, value1_.release_type)
value2_ = value1_.format.parse('3.0.1')
assert_equal(3, value2_.major)
assert_equal(0, value2_.minor)
assert_equal(1, value2_.tiny)
assert_equal(:final, value2_.release_type)
end
end
```
fitzoh
2017-04-08 02:57
If you look at the example from there ^, you'll see it has a url path with the provider, consumer, and version ```curl -v -XPUT \-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d@spec/pacts/a_consumer-a_provider.json \
http://your-pact-broker/pacts/provider/A%20Provider/consumer/A%20Consumer/version/1.0.0```
thadir
2017-04-10 08:37
@fitzoh I had dabled in it a bit. But seeing its hosted, I think we need to make it dynamic and configurable. I know Ruby allouws for regex etc. Im more Java and Angular2 my self. But I think we can figure this out to make this configurable :slightly_smiling_face:
abe
2017-04-10 09:52
I take it there is no way to create users for the broker so each team can only edit there own pacts
abe
2017-04-10 09:54
@matt i was using the git hub read me but it was not very clear as to its requirements what solved it for me in the end was random blog post
matt
2017-04-10 09:56
If you think about it, your creating a resource so the path is important (there are other API end points also). We should publish an API doc I think
abe
2017-04-10 13:01
is there a way to create users per consumer so each consumer can only upload there own pacts?
abe
2017-04-10 14:36
one other question out to the community but has any one got the provider test validation working with the:
abe
2017-04-10 14:45
@abe uploaded a file: https://pact-foundation.slack.com/files/UB7USKSCT/FB7FQC68H/-_txt
abe
2017-04-10 14:46
we also tried replacing the BrokerURL with https://pactAccount.pact.dius.com.au/pacts/provider/my-service/consumer/my-consumer/version/1.0.0
matt
2017-04-12 08:38
@abe did you raise that issue? I just pulled the latest binary and ran an integration test and that published just fine
matt
2017-04-12 08:41
if you want to prove that publishing worked, run a delete on that consumer + provider:
```
curl -v -XDELETE -u 'dXfltyFMgNOFZAxr8io9wJ37iUpY42M:O5AIZWxelWbLvqMd8PkAVycBJh2Psyg1' https://test.pact.dius.com.au/pacticipants/bobby
curl -v -XDELETE -u 'dXfltyFMgNOFZAxr8io9wJ37iUpY42M:O5AIZWxelWbLvqMd8PkAVycBJh2Psyg1' https://test.pact.dius.com.au/pacticipants/billy`
```
Then head over to https://test.pact.dius.com.au/ui/relationships to see that they?re gone before running the tests
thadir
2017-04-25 09:57
I have been wondering is there a reason there is a version number in the pact-jvm-provider artifactID for maven?
matt
2017-04-25 09:59
Hmm not sure. Compatibility with other jobs I'm guessing. This question might be best asked on the gutter channel for that project tho
thadir
2017-04-25 10:00
:slightly_smiling_face:, eather is good, but for that I would expect difrent methods. Ill poke them about it. were slowly getting pact forged in our processes. How is the status on the custom versioning numbers for hosting? I know the pact-broker supports it but for the hosting its still a challange.
matt
2017-04-25 12:01
Ah sorry, I was on the go. From memory the versioning in the artifact ids relate to Scala stuff like 2_10/2_11 or something like that?
matt
2017-04-25 12:03
As for the versioning, I?ve no update other than to say we?ve captured that request. Have you any suggestions as to how we might implement it to meet your needs?
matt
2017-04-25 12:04
I?m thinking it could be a toggle set via the UI from a set of pre-defined versioning schemes. Or potentially even better, the ability to specify a scheme via regex
beth
2017-04-26 01:15
Hi , I am looking for some broker users to try out a beta version of the pact broker that will include the ability to record and visualise provider verification results. Please join me in the #verifications channel if you are interested.
thadir
2017-05-01 13:43
@beth ya dont wanna know :sweat_smile: bit messy how we do it. For master builds we use a part of the build of the Git HASH, for release builds we use symantic builds. So we need both options to work for us (sorry for the late response, it was a national holiday here in the netherlands)
thadir
2017-05-02 09:04
I Warned you its not pritty :sweat_smile:, So master builds have the folowing:
2017-05-01_16-33-40dad2e
2017-05-01_16-25-40dad2e
They have the time stamp in there, but it would be more convient that we could sort on the date setted in the system.
Symantic versions for releases are like 1.0.1.
Then snapshots are err even worse in our case:
security-api-PR-17-20170502.080752-1
thadir
2017-05-02 09:04
So yeah, its messy I have no controll on this. To big a thing to not have symantic versions in there.
mouser
2017-05-02 23:46
hey guys, we?ve noticed that the icon for accessing a PACT on the broker homepage seems to have gone walkabout after the upgrade? could someone take a look for us?
abubics
2017-05-02 23:54
you can still get to it by drilling through a consumer/provider, then the arrow between the pair you want
matt
2017-05-03 01:24
I?ve submitted a patch for that display issue, I?m not _quite_ sure what is going on there, but it seems jq is not firing the right event to attach the icon
matt
2017-05-03 08:45
No worries, we should be able to update the hosted version in the next day or two
thadir
2017-05-03 09:44
@matt about the hosted version, how far along are you guys with the user management at the moment we only have this basic http autentication protecting it all. And for now its good (Its still a pilot at all) but I sort of want the publisher to have the richts of publising and viewer to only see stuff etc.
beth
2017-05-05 00:52
@thadir I'm just working on creating separate read/write basic auth accounts, but they won't be resource specific.
beth
2017-05-05 00:53
both consumer and provider accounts will be publishing _something_ when we release the verifications stuff.
beth
2017-05-05 01:34
I've just released version 1.18.0.beta.1 of the broker gem with basic auth built in. The documentation is available here: https://github.com/bethesque/pact_broker/wiki/Configuration#using-basic-auth
beth
2017-05-05 01:35
You can configure multiple users against multiple scopes (ie. read, write, diagnostics, all app)
abubics
2017-05-05 01:36
sounds kinda like some people want read/write accounts (for provider/consumer publishers) and read-only accounts to just view everything on the broker . . . that sounds efforty
beth
2017-05-05 01:40
Yes, some people only want to protect the write requests. Some people want to allow devs to read/write and other users to just read. This will support all of those options.
beth
2017-05-05 03:50
Hm... I'll have a think. The sorting algorithm would need to have different arguments in your case - that's the complicating factor. At the moment, the version parsing code only needs the version itself. Then, we sort on the outcome of that parsing.
marcevers
2017-05-05 06:45
hi, yesterday we tried publishing a pact with an invalid version to the hoster broker and we noticed that error responses from the broker are not processed correctly any more by the pact-jvm-provider maven plugin (we're using version 3.3.8). It fails with "Execution default-cli of goal au.com.dius:pact-jvm-provider-maven_2.11:3.3.8:publish failed: No signature of method: groovy.json.internal.LazyMap.join() is applicable for argument types: (java.lang.String) values: [, ]"
rholshausen
2017-05-05 06:50
@marcevers Can you raise that as an issue at https://github.com/DiUS/pact-jvm
beth
2017-05-05 11:41
I've had a think about this, and you have two options. One is you can do a little code hack as per this example here: https://gist.github.com/bethesque/31c2d00f93bb6168cbbc645bcbc08688
beth
2017-05-05 11:43
The second is that you can append/prepend a consistent timestamp to every one of your version formats when you publish to the broker. Then you can configure the version parser to extract the consistent date part, and the rest of the code will use that to sort on.
thadir
2017-05-08 17:03
beth: Hmm the documatation link is a tad broken becouse its not on you repo or on the pact-foundation wiki it self
thadir
2017-05-08 17:04
@rholshausen We have issu can be found @https://github.com/DiUS/pact-jvm/issues/421
beth
2017-05-12 05:45
@thadir I've added in code to allow sorting by creation date of the application version.
beth
2017-05-12 05:45
I've made it configurable - we just have to decide how we're going to manage configuration for the saas brokers.
beth
2017-05-12 06:15
Sorry @thadir, after discussing with @matt and @rholshausen I decided to back the changes out and wait until we did proper user authentication. I meant to revoke my announcement on Monday, but I got sidetracked.
thadir
2017-05-12 08:31
Thats ok, no rusing, :slightly_smiling_face: just a feature I realy want :slightly_smiling_face: hence me asking.
thadir
2017-05-12 08:34
Ok, yeah I figured you sort of needed a new colmn. I think we sort of need a extra UI for configuring the broker in saas or somting (thats what we do with our hosted dockers as well btw).
matt
2017-05-12 12:51
Rest assure this is high on our roadmap @thadir. Verifications was something we needed to bring to the entire community first, but user management is in progress as it is a common feature request.
thadir
2017-05-12 12:52
I know, just telling it as it is. Were slowly ramping up the usage. So version if for us a bigger then then autentication. But thats becouse the nature for us how we do versions.
matt
2017-05-13 03:07
Please keep the feedback coming! This request came through in a couple of comments recently in our public survey. We are looking at strategies to enable multiple types of versioning and managing configuration via APIs or user interfaces. Keep your ears peeled, we will likely get in touch with you to discuss this further
beth
2017-05-16 05:01
Hi all. We're looking at adding "proper" auth to the pact broker. Please join me in the #auth channel and let me know what providers you'd like the broker to integrate with.
fitzoh
2017-05-17 05:14
I just saw this pr: https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact_broker/pull/88... Does that mean that custom version parsing is going away?
beth
2017-05-17 05:44
@fitzoh the default parser has been upgraded to work with semver2, but custom parsing still works as before.
matt
2017-05-17 05:45
I realised the way I sent it was probably a little bit misleading, but it all worked out :slightly_smiling_face:
fitzoh
2017-05-17 05:46
but I just put in a PR that will make that a non-issue for me: https://github.com/DiUS/pact-jvm/pull/431
cc @rholshausen
fitzoh
2017-05-17 05:48
I'd have to imagine that's a pretty common issue if any other java people are using the pact broker (unless they're just not publishing non-release pacts)
thadir
2017-05-17 08:35
Great to hear, looking forward to it :slightly_smiling_face:, I must say were quite happy how things are working out with Pact and the broker so keep up the good work.
beth
2017-05-17 09:13
The new version parser allows you to configure multiple patterns for it to look for. We could potentially get it to work around the SNAPSHOT. I'll have a look at it.
matt
2017-05-17 09:35
I think https://docs.oracle.com/middleware/1212/core/MAVEN/maven_version.htm#MAVEN402 explains it best
thadir
2017-05-17 11:08
@matt I think we should tahnk you origonaly the plan was to manage a docker in our own envyroment, and I think ousourcing it is a lot better helps the comunity and development of Pact and helps us help and you helping us. Its a nice 2 way street :wink:.
matt
2017-05-17 11:11
FWIW we want to be as transparent as we can. At some point, there will be a paid offering with some of these ?Enterprise? features, if you will. There will be a free tier, but in terms of pricing our aim is to make it cost neutral in order to support development efforts and cover hosting etc.
thadir
2017-05-17 11:12
@matt We filled in the form, and I am willing to pay for it (e.g. the comapny witch hired me as well) so no biggy :wink:. Beta is a nice play ground, but when its stable we want you to take the money to keep the service going.
thadir
2017-05-17 11:14
I fixed it to do it totaly difrent @matt and @beth my snapshots are named like this: PR-20-20170516.134509-7 (where PR is the pull request number of the given articadt0 the date is the build date and the 7 is the amount of build attempt it is. Versioning in Maven is quite free flow tbh. So if you need input we got a java engineer here to spare to help out with questions.
thadir
2017-05-17 11:25
@matt its so flexible you can do it in many ways, in our company we dont think in snapshots for our test builds, but in pull request seeing a snapshot is local and pull request is part of our flow to bring it to master (and thus production)
thadir
2017-05-17 11:33
It is, its less flexable then Ant and Gradle but if you want you can go far -_-
eskimoquinn
2017-05-19 16:15
Hopefully this is the correct place for this. I am trying to download pact files from my hosted pack broker using pactbroker-maven-plugin. I am able to upload with this plugin, but cannot download. I receive an HTTP response of 406 NOT ACCEPTABLE. Any help? Known issue?
thadir
2017-05-19 16:48
In this case you should add the folwogin maven command to your commandline build: -Dpact.broker.username=<username> -Dpact.broker.password=<password>
beth
2017-05-21 05:50
@eskimoquinn @matt @rholshausen That might be to do with that content type issue issue that Ron discovered where it was returning a 406 when application/hal+json was being requested (and only "application/json" was provided). Let's upgrade the broker.
rob.lugton
2017-05-22 07:09
Hi all, has anyone ever used pact with graphql (http://www.graphql.org) before?
rholshausen
2017-05-22 07:10
No, but we have discussed that graphql is maybe not a good candidate for contract tests
trenthornibrook
2017-05-22 07:11
why not a good candidate? Because theres some validation built in? like https://github.com/graphql/graphql-js/tree/master/src/validation
rholshausen
2017-05-22 22:45
Yes, you define the schema so it validates it for you. Some for Google protocol buffers.
beth
2017-05-24 03:41
@trenthornibrook yes, I've used pact between a react UI and an api. The react is kind of irrelevant really.
abubics
2017-05-24 04:23
@beth @trenthornibrook: totally agree, React should be irrelevant for Pact. If your app is architected nicely, the services that talk to APIs shouldn?t be touching UI.
thadir
2017-05-24 08:20
@beth we didnt have a chance yet, but it will happen soon. No complains up to now but we didnt add new tests to the suite or masterbuilds.
eskimoquinn
2017-05-31 19:07
Anybody know when the "last verified" time is updated for a pact in the broker UI? We are verifying the pacts on the provider side, but that time does not seem to be updated in the broker UI. We are using the pact-jvm-provider-maven plugin.
eskimoquinn
2017-06-01 00:25
I raised an issue in github, but I am wondering if perhaps someone here would be able to help also. This link (https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-provider-proxy/issues/7) has my code snippets, but basically I want to verify a pact against a remote service (from our CI test suite). The pact has provider states and I want to call the remote service to verify the pact. The pacts that do not have provider states work as I would expect, however, the pact with the provider state does not.
matt
2017-06-01 00:46
Looks like Ron has responded. Hopefully we?ll have the JVM verifications out soon - lot?s happening at the moment!
eskimoquinn
2017-06-01 20:22
In reply to the pact-provider-proxy, I was able to get things working by explicitly declaring the pact_states file in the rake task. So probably not a bug per se, but not quite how the documentation described it.
beth
2017-06-03 01:05
@eskimoquinn the documentation actually does describe it in the README. Is there somewhere else that contradicts this that I've missed?
eskimoquinn
2017-06-03 01:39
@beth I did see the original note but I think we were having two simultaneous problems which were obscuring that we mis-configured the helper. The README is clear. Thanks for the help!
eskimoquinn
2017-06-03 01:41
And for everyone here, we are going to be adopting pact on our team and trying to spread it to the other devs in our org. Excited to use pact.
matt
2017-06-03 01:42
That?s great to hear @eskimoquinn - feel free to reach out if you need any help with that!
stein
2017-06-05 22:33
Hi guys, what?s the correct way to delete a webhook? I am using the hosted broker and calling `DELETE https://<subdomain>.http://pact.dius.com.au/webhooks/DDrB0LyxhMmEDKeQos3U8Q` gives me
```
{
"message": "undefined method `delete_executions_by_webhook_uuid' for #<PactBroker::Webhooks::Repository:0x000000040925c8>",
"backtrace": [
"/home/app/pact_broker/vendor/bundle/ruby/2.2.0/bundler/gems/pact_broker-0d2479decb12/lib/pact_broker/webhooks/service.rb:34:in `delete_by_uuid'",
"/home/app/pact_broker/vendor/bundle/ruby/2.2.0/bundler/gems/pact_broker-0d2479decb12/lib/pact_broker/api/resources/webhook.rb:27:in `delete_resource'",
"/home/app/pact_broker/vendor/bundle/ruby/2.2.0/gems/webmachine-1.4.0/lib/webmachine/decision/flow.rb:399:in `m20'",
...
}
```
matt
2017-06-05 22:37
That looks correct according to https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact_broker/blob/master/lib/pact_broker/doc/views/webhooks.markdown
matt
2017-06-05 22:38
Could be a bug in the broker, if you DM me I can look into it for you and we can look to create a patch.
eskimoquinn
2017-06-09 20:06
Hey PACT folks, we would love to be able to add specific notes about using the service to our autogenerated pact documentation in the broker. We currently add usage notes which provide additional explanatory text about the service. Is there anyway to do this currently?
matt
2017-06-10 04:25
This has come up a few times, actually were you asking this on Gitter by any chance? At the moment, this feature doesn?t exist but we?ll pop it into a backlog and see where we might be able to fit it in. Which language do you use?
eskimoquinn
2017-06-12 20:11
@matt we are using java on the consumer side and ruby on the provider side. So of immediate use for use would be the jvm-consumer
beth
2017-06-13 00:08
eskimoquinn: At one stage I was planning to add a consumer/provider documentation URL to the configuration. Given that the text could be quite long, would a URL meet your needs?
eskimoquinn
2017-06-16 17:02
I ran into what I think is a bug with the JVM consumer. When I supply an example value in the matchHeader method of the fragment, the reponse body is escaped in the pact JSON: ``` .willRespondWith()
.status(200)
.matchHeader("Content-Type", "application/json", "example")```
produces: ```"body": "{\"jobId\":\"345\"}",```. Without the example, the JSON looks like ``` "body": "{"jobId":"345"}",```
beth
2017-06-18 22:09
eskimoquinn: I'm guessing it's because it uses the example header to determine the content type of the body, and your example suggests it's not json, so it's being encoded as a string.
eskimoquinn
2017-06-19 14:45
Yes confirm that to be true. I assumed that example would not actually control anything other than a display. Thanks!
jdbann
2017-06-22 13:51
has anyone used pact with graphql? looking at setting my teams up but we?re migrating the api to graphql later in the year and don?t want to create a headache at a later date
rholshausen
2017-06-22 22:27
@jdbann as far as I understand, GraphQL uses HTTP so you could in theory use Pact. But my thoughts are that, as the schema is defined as part of the protocol, you don't need a contract test.
phil
2017-06-23 10:32
Hi People. I've used the Pact Broker a few times in the past but never set one up. I've just asked for (and got) your free hosted pact server. I want to publish to it using 'scala pact'. Do you know if that is possible (I'm having problems setting up the credientials)
phil
2017-06-23 10:55
Thanks for responding! It's a pretty simple issue: there doesn't appear to be a way using scala pact to specify credentials. I've looked at the manuals and quickly looked at the code. I wondered if anyone had any experience with this? At the moment I've just dropped back to using curl to push the files which works well enough
beth
2017-06-23 11:04
Ah, that is quite possible. The Scala pact stuff was written a while ago, and hasn't been updated as often or as recently as the other jvm code. It shouldn't be too hard to add though. Can you raise an issue in the repo?
beth
2017-06-23 11:08
Basic for now. We're just doing a JWT spike for an authentication service we're evaluating for use with the hosted broker.
fitzoh
2017-06-25 15:06
I was thinking it'd be kind of a cool showcase if there was a publicly viewable pact broker which managed pacts for the pact ecosystem
fitzoh
2017-06-25 15:07
I should be able to go there to see the interactions between a `pact-broker` provider and a `pact-jvm` consumer
j03w
2017-06-26 01:34
hi folks, our broker has been returning 500 since this morning any ideas how we can debug this?
rholshausen
2017-06-29 22:26
@fpelletier there is no self-service for credentials yet (we're working on it), but I'm sure @matt could help you out there
mngau
2017-06-30 07:57
@mngau uploaded a file: https://pact-foundation.slack.com/files/UB7USM90B/FB7R4K8SY/pasted_image_at_2017_06_30_17_57_png
beth
2017-07-04 03:46
Hey broker users, I'm looking at adding verification badges like this to the broker. Given that the badge would be accessed over the public internet, and you can't use basic auth in README markdown, would you consider it a privacy leak to access a badge without authentication?
abubics
2017-07-04 04:15
If all you?re leaking is a guid (or similar), I think it?s fine.
(same leak as buildkite, which doesn?t mean it?s ok, but I also haven?t heard of any exploits)
fpelletier
2017-07-04 15:04
the documentation links for `pb:latest-provider-pacts` and `pb:latest-provider-pacts-with-tag` are broken :four: :zero: :four:
beth
2017-07-05 04:52
The documentation link shows whether or not a document actually exists at the given URL.
mattcoder
2017-07-05 10:55
hey guys, great to join this group, i am stuggling with connecting dots with pactnet and pact broker, this is a cool place we can chat and meet with community poking this technology.
beth
2017-07-05 11:04
FYI, most of the core pact team lives in Australia, so if we are slow to respond, it's because we're asleep! But there should be some other people around who are awake if we aren't.
mattcoder
2017-07-05 11:15
Great to meet you Beth, i have an issue with connecting and post pact file to the pact broker
matt
2017-07-05 11:18
For reference, the APIs are documented here in case you haven?t seen https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact_broker/wiki/Publishing-and-retrieving-pacts
matt
2017-07-05 11:19
You?ll obviously need to transpose curl into `Invoke-WebRequest` or `Invoke-RestMethod` or similar
matt
2017-07-05 11:26
I think something like this is what you want:
```
$JSON = Get-Content "path\to\pact.json"
$response = Invoke-RestMethod -Uri "http://your-pact-broker/pacts/provider/A%20Provider/consumer/A%20Consumer/version/1.0.0" -Method Put -Body $JSON -ContentType "application/json"
```
beth
2017-07-05 11:37
The publishing link for dot net here seems broken https://docs.pact.io/documentation/sharings_pacts.html
matt
2017-07-05 11:56
```
$Headers = @{
Authorization = "Basic $([System.Convert]::ToBase64String([System.Text.Encoding]::ASCII.GetBytes("dXfltyFMgNOFZAxr8io9wJ37iUpY42M:O5AIZWxelWbLvqMd8PkAVycBJh2Psyg1")))"
}
$res = Invoke-WebRequest -Uri "https://test.pact.dius.com.au/pacts/provider/Animal%20Profile%20Service/consumer/Matching%20Service/version/1.0.0" -Headers $Headers -Method Put -InFile .\matching_service-animal_profile_service.json -ContentType "application/json"
```
finkingma
2017-07-05 12:13
hey guys, I started playing around with the new pact broker. However I am having trouble getting the 'last verified' option confirmed.
1) I started with an empty broker.
2) published a new pact.
3) had it validated with my provider. Everything went great so far (shown that it was verified).
4) published a new version of the pact.
finkingma
2017-07-05 12:14
However, once I tried confirming the changed version. The warning symbol kept showing up
matt
2017-07-05 12:15
I actually had this issue the other day myself, hoping Beth can clarify what?s happening here!
matt
2017-07-05 12:16
You might be able to use the HAL browser to navigate to the verifications API and see what it has to say
finkingma
2017-07-05 12:20
when posting a verification result using postman, I get a normal 201 status code with a nice json response, but my pactbroker still shows the warning sign
matt
2017-07-05 12:21
I?m suspecting maybe it?s something to do with versions, perhaps we?ve verified _a_ version but not the latest or something?
finkingma
2017-07-05 12:23
ow you're right. I've got two versions now. But the response I get when publishing shows the old version
finkingma
2017-07-05 12:29
same for the pact versions btw. I publish verification results for generated pact version '2b6a47a161a4141e76940912794301f9272a4070' (which is my latest pact). However, in my response I get a different pact version '2ba1d0b6642f276aec8ed56230a8bc48cf54efed' (which is my initial pact).
matt
2017-07-05 12:30
I don?t know the underlying model well enough to understand, we?ll have to wait for @beth
matt
2017-07-05 12:30
I also need to run I?m afraid, I need to get this fixed also so will report back any findings!
abubics
2017-07-05 12:31
when someone posted a high semver version, then posting 1.0.0 again seemed like nothing was wrong, but never updated in any of the UI
beth
2017-07-05 20:09
Yup, it's designed that way. The "latest" version is calculated by the semver, not the time stamp, unless you configure it to use the time stamp.
matt
2017-07-05 22:13
If you want a test case, the `test` broker has the same problem for the `billy->bobby` relationship :slightly_smiling_face:
beth
2017-07-05 22:24
as a sweetener folks, you can beta test the new verification badges I've just added. Here's one from the http://test.pact.dius.com.au server: https://test.pact.dius.com.au/pacts/provider/Activity%20Service/consumer/Foo%20Web%20Client/latest/badge.svg
beth
2017-07-05 22:25
If you want to shorten it, you can add the param `initials=true`: https://test.pact.dius.com.au/pacts/provider/Activity%20Service/consumer/Foo%20Web%20Client/latest/badge.svg?initials=true
beth
2017-07-05 22:27
And if you only want to see the consumer or provider name because you already know who *you* are, you can add `label=consumer` or `label=provider`: https://test.pact.dius.com.au/pacts/provider/Activity%20Service/consumer/Foo%20Web%20Client/latest/badge.svg?label=consumer
matt
2017-07-05 22:28
Is there a way to just check the status of all verifications for a single consumer i.e. ?pact|verified? implying all providers for the current consumer have been verified?
beth
2017-07-05 22:29
I was trying to work out the logic for that, and it became so complicated, I started with the simple pact status first.
beth
2017-07-05 22:30
If we can work out the logic, then I can easily add them. The problem is, there's no way of knowing which "latest" pact is the one that is the important one. Latest untagged? Latest master?
fpelletier
2017-07-05 22:30
simple question, does PactNet have the capability to publish a pact to a given pact broker?
beth
2017-07-05 22:31
I only had a quick look last night on my phone though. Let me check if Neil has gotten back to me (he's one of the pact net authors)
matt
2017-07-05 22:31
@fpelletier see https://pactbroker.slack.com/archives/C47D4FGPR/p1499255790852938 for an example publishing via PoSH
beth
2017-07-05 22:32
No reply from Neil yet, I'll let you know when he does. If there isn't one, we'll raise an issue and get it done.
matt
2017-07-05 22:32
It?s a pretty simple API, for a .NET superstar it shouldn?t take too long - PR?s are welcome :slightly_smiling_face:
matt
2017-07-05 22:34
You?re most welcome. Is it just a .NET project or do you have other languages also?
fpelletier
2017-07-05 22:37
@matt we're trying to restrain ourselves to supported M$ techs, but it doesn't mean that we will not go with other options if the .NET library is not good enough
matt
2017-07-05 22:38
OK. So all of the services you?ll be testing are in a single language, that will be helpful to know.
abubics
2017-07-05 23:38
it?s not a behaviour problem, it was just confusing . . . a warning that I?m doing something dumb might be all that?s needed :stuck_out_tongue:
beth
2017-07-05 23:49
Someone else has mentioned it before. I think it mostly bites people when they're testing it, not irl.
beth
2017-07-05 23:51
I've been considering removing all restrictions on the version format, and just sorting by date.
abubics
2017-07-05 23:56
that might be a better default for iteration-0 work, but maybe less good the rest of the time . . .
abubics
2017-07-05 23:57
or maybe working on backwards compat isn?t the normal use case for anyone :stuck_out_tongue:
beth
2017-07-06 00:02
99% of the time, I imagine the latest sem version will be the most recently published
beth
2017-07-06 00:04
If you go backwards with your sem ver, you've probably made a mistake, and you want the most recent one anyway.
thadir
2017-07-06 07:46
beth: This could also be a way to make the build cycle for java apps to go round. And also make sure a consumer validates the Provider (in a build agent or somting like that).
mattcoder
2017-07-06 08:02
$Headers = @{
Authorization = "Basic $([System.Convert]::ToBase64String([System.Text.Encoding]::ASCII.GetBytes('gzLoGGOFaNQrLtkXRMyfGKCrdJVzNH:SS7iSXHmV7iQYjFvtX6linbFFtf9Iwzh')))"
}
$response = Invoke-WebRequest -Uri 'https://arris.pact.dius.com.au/pacts/provider/api/consumer/consumer%20event/version/1.0.0'
-Headers $Headers -Method Put -InFile .\consumer-event_api.json -ContentType 'application/json'
abubics
2017-07-06 08:06
maybe, up to you . . . I doubt there are any malicious users in here, but it?s good to have safe habits
mattcoder
2017-07-06 08:11
not a problem at all, great reminding though, matt sent me the cmdlet that is with the credential he is owning, so i wud assume thiis is safe, but you right, better be careful;-)
abubics
2017-07-06 08:13
I have to go, but I definitely get a 404 from
```
curl "https://$user:$pass@arris.pact.dius.com.au/pacts/provider/api/consumer/consumer%20event/version/1.0.0"
```
, not 401
abubics
2017-07-06 08:17
you could also try putting the username and password in the url, as in my `curl`
abubics
2017-07-06 08:26
guess you?ll have to wait for a PoSh person to help :slightly_smiling_face: soz
thadir
2017-07-06 08:30
nvm. we already fixed this. Were still strugeling with the fact that in java you cant autmaticly trigger the provider to make sure the pact is fully verified. So were experimenting. I saw the badges and touch we could use this.
But the badges is more for the status page of a project intended so it was a early no coffee moment for me.
matt
2017-07-06 08:45
Unfortunately there is no such option for `Invoke-WebRequest` @abubics, you need to either create a `Credential` object or manually construct the `Authorization` header as we?re doing here
matt
2017-07-06 09:24
FWIW I?ve published a pact to your broker using the below command. @mattcoder, please check your pact dashboard
matt
2017-07-06 09:24
for others, the magic looks like below:
```
$Headers = @{
Authorization = "Basic $([System.Convert]::ToBase64String([System.Text.Encoding]::ASCII.GetBytes('YOURUSERNAME:YOURPASSWORD')))"
}
$response = Invoke-WebRequest -Uri 'https://YOURHOST.pact.dius.com.au/pacts/provider/YOUR%20PROVIDER/consumer/YOUR%20CONSUMER/version/1.0.0' -Headers $Headers -Method Put -InFile ./pact.json -ContentType 'application/json'
```
matt
2017-07-06 09:25
It?s _really_ important that the provider and consumer in the path match those in the pact files (but of course converted to URL friendly values)
beth
2017-07-06 09:26
Mwah ha ha, yes, I put in some very strict validation, otherwise it would be a mess.
finkingma
2017-07-06 10:14
btw, is there a way to get the badge for specific tags as well? I tried using using https://XXXX.pact.dius.com.au/pacts/provider/MapMakerApi/consumer/ExploratoryTestingGame/latest/prod/badge.svg but that didn't work. Would be great if we could see if specific latest tags would be verified
beth
2017-07-06 10:17
Wondering whether it's useful to put the "3 days ago" text that is shown on the index page, or to just keep it simple.
beth
2017-07-06 10:18
I used never, failed, verified and unknown. But happy to take suggestions for improvements.
finkingma
2017-07-06 10:19
I'd expect something like 'changed' or something. Gives more info about what action is required from team
beth
2017-07-07 01:03
New feature announcement - if you're using tags, there is now an endpoint to retrieve the latest untagged pact. The url is `/pacts/provider/PROVIDER/consumer/CONSUMER/latest-untagged`
beth
2017-07-07 03:50
@mattcoder Neil, the main http://pact.net maintainer says there is no .net code for publishing, however, he points people to this script that he wrote: https://gist.github.com/neilcampbell/bc1fb7d409425894ece0
beth
2017-07-07 07:29
Glad you like it. It was a fun little piece to write. It's using http://shields.io behind the scenes to dynamically create the badges, but we might stand up our own shields server if required.
fitzoh
2017-07-10 03:20
@beth and @matt , I've got a sort of complicated use case if you guys want to hear it
fitzoh
2017-07-10 03:21
So we've got a monolith we've been working on untangling for a while that has a bunch of logical services in it
fitzoh
2017-07-10 03:22
and a couple services which have been split out and are now deployed separately
fitzoh
2017-07-10 03:23
because when we deploy the monolith, we're deploying a bunch of services instead of just one
fitzoh
2017-07-10 03:24
so we would need to maintain a manual list of all of the services contained within that deployment, and then tag all of those on a deploy
fitzoh
2017-07-10 03:26
and the deploy job kicks off a parameterized job and passes in either `microservice-name` or `monolith`, then a gradle task parses that, fetches every paticipant from the broker, filters for ones that match the service name/prefix, and then tags all of them
fitzoh
2017-07-10 03:27
not sure if hierarchical/linked pacticipants are common/something you should necessarily design around, but thought you might be interested
beth
2017-07-10 03:29
Thanks for sharing your usecase @fitzoh. We always like to hear how the broker is being used in the wild to work out what features to build. People always use things in a way you'd never expect, and it's kind of delightful to hear about.
beth
2017-07-10 03:29
If you don't mind, I'll copy that it an issue for our list of future feature ideas.
fitzoh
2017-07-10 03:31
potentially? would tagging a service essentially mean that it's an alias of the tag?
beth
2017-07-10 03:33
You could tag a pacticipant with an arbitrary string, and then retrieve them by that string.
beth
2017-07-10 03:35
I do wish I'd called "tags" "labels" instead, as I think it would have been less confusing with git tags.
fitzoh
2017-07-10 03:37
when we deploy to `stage`, we tag that docker image as `stage` and add a `stage` tag to the corresponding pact files
beth
2017-07-10 03:40
I've added this issue: https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact_broker/issues/124
fitzoh
2017-07-10 03:41
hmm... maybe it would make more sense to have tags for pacts and labels for consumers?
fitzoh
2017-07-10 03:42
I feel like the use cases are probably different enough for the two that it might make sense to use different names
thadir
2017-07-10 09:27
Were slowly ramping up our usage of the pact broker. And as usual im loving it. But i see a slight ui improvement we could use. You can go to the network graph of an pact. And thats great and all but i would also love to have a filter or somting of witch patcht versions there are and stuff like that. Now its a nice flow diagram but its quite quick confuluded.
beth
2017-07-10 09:44
My original plan was for the selected service to be in the centre, and then show you all the services it used. Then, as you selected each other service, it would become the centre one.
beth
2017-07-10 09:46
We've got some extra people on the team now, with more UI foo than I have, who will be putting some polish on the whole thing.
thadir
2017-07-11 12:26
@beth ill dm you a few things somere this weak, (with some screen shots and ui ideas)
thadir
2017-07-12 08:16
@matt its in our own selfish interest if we give good input you can get swayed to do it in a way we prefere :wink:.
finkingma
2017-07-12 14:57
was just wondering something: the homepage of the pact broker now shows the latest published / last verified status for this pact, regardless of tags. Is there also a way to see if the latest prod version is still verified? Besides badges :slightly_smiling_face: I'm currently using the broker just in my own personal project, but while working on a feature I kinda miss that information on the homepage of the broker
kunwardeep
2017-07-13 04:05
Just curious about the usage of PACTs . Given that its contract testing... how do we test the contract between the app and the db(s3 to sql). Or do we use other strategies for it
rholshausen
2017-07-13 04:07
@kunwardeep I wouldn't test the contract between an app and a data store. But I have tested the contract via a data store (Dynamodb) where one service wrote a document and another then consumed it.
kunwardeep
2017-07-13 04:51
so does that mean that you mocked the dynamo layer somehow or wrote and read from an actual db?
rholshausen
2017-07-13 06:16
On the provider side, we got the provider to write to the DB and then generated the pact from that. On the consumer side, the Pact test populated the DB from the pact file and invoked the consumer to read it.
kunwardeep
2017-07-14 00:35
Can some one point me in the direction of some documentation regarding writing a new implementation of PACT?
beth
2017-07-14 01:11
So you'll want the javascript docs here: https://docs.pact.io/documentation/javascript.html
kunwardeep
2017-07-14 01:19
elm compiles into javascript but is not used the same way as javascript(when making api call)
kunwardeep
2017-07-14 01:19
so was wondering if there are any docs as such to create a new pact library
beth
2017-07-14 23:10
@kunwardeep I realised after I'd sent you that link that the guidelines were heavily out of date. I've done a major re-write of them. Can you have another look please?
matt
2017-07-15 07:37
For those on Windows, Pact .NET just released an update to publish pacts via the library: https://github.com/SEEK-Jobs/pact-net#publishing-pacts-to-a-broker
beth
2017-07-24 00:44
@fitzoh I've added labels to pacticipants, and added the /pacticipants/label/{label} endpoint. I'm just trying to work out what templated URLs to add to the resource to make your use case work as simply as possible.
shenahas
2017-07-26 23:04
I am using JUnit for generating Pacts and Pacts maven plugin to post the pact into pact broker. I am using below plugin Configuration.While Consumenr pact is getting uploaded in broker, I am able to see only single entry of consumer pact of version 2.0. Eirlier I have uploaded version 1.0 eirlier, which is not present in the UI. Is there any way to see the multiple version of same provider pact in HAL browser and get different version of PACTS by Https GET request? Currently I am getting only latest consumenr pact version by http://your-pact-broker/pacts/provider/PROVIDER/consumer/CONSUMER/latest Please provide some info regurding this and let me know if you need any informaiton.
shenahas
2017-07-26 23:05
posted same question here <https://stackoverflow.com/questions/45338491/multiple-pact-version-support-from-pact-broker>
kale.mcnaney
2017-08-02 22:15
need some help. just got beta access but my host is 503ing https://goodwaygroup.pact.dius.com.au/
mouser
2017-08-02 22:30
Getting a ?Service Unavailable: Back-end server is at capacity? error when trying to fetch PACTs from the broker
matt
2017-08-02 22:35
There is a small DNS change coming your way, TTL on the main load balancer is 60s so things should be coming back up shortly
matt
2017-08-02 23:04
System is stabilising folks, please send any feedback or issues if you have any new issues. We?ll continue to monitor progress throughout the morning
mouser
2017-08-02 23:17
all looking good from our perspective - thanks for getting onto it so quickly @matt!
matt
2017-08-03 13:37
For what it?s worth, we?re having a retro on this on Monday and we?ll probably look to re-architecture some of the system as a result. We?ve had a lot more customers join the platform and we need to work through some peculiarities with Kubernetes that underlined the problem.
shenahas
2017-08-04 01:40
HI Beth, I am facing issue while connecting with dockerized pact-broker to non-dockerized postgresql. I have raised a question to https://stackoverflow.com/questions/45496934/pactbroker-docker-image-connection-issue-with-non-dockerized-postgresql Please answer if possible
beth
2017-08-04 02:01
Sure, will have a look as soon as I can. I always use a non docker postgres installation, so there should be no problem.
beth
2017-08-11 02:07
Hey everyone. Just letting you know that things have been a bit quiet on the feature development as @matt and I have been working out on client sites, but we haven't forgotten about you all!
beth
2017-08-11 02:08
We've selected a provider for implementing our social logon feature, and it will be the next thing we implement.
beth
2017-08-11 02:09
The first two 3rd party authentication providers will most likely be github and google.
matt
2017-08-11 06:54
Yep! And we?re also going to be rolling out some platform changes in the background over the coming weeks. One will be going through this evening to improve stability in performance and throughput
matt
2017-08-11 07:36
Change has gone out successfully, you may have noticed a couple of blips on your radars as containers were shuffled about, but there is now a bit more capacity in the cluster which should hopefully create more consistent performance
acooper106
2017-08-30 18:24
I am trying to publish to a local pack broker with @pact-foundation/pact-node@4.12.0. When I run the publishPacts function I am not getting a pact on the broker. It does work when I publish with pact-jvm using mvn pact:publish.
Does anyone know how to fix this issue?
Also, there are no errors in the terminal.
eskimoquinn
2017-08-30 19:32
Hello here, I am wondering if there is a way to manipulate the request when using the pact-provider-proxy https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-provider-proxy
eskimoquinn
2017-08-30 19:33
I'd like to modify the request like this document suggests, but I do not think it is possible when using the provider proxy: https://github.com/realestate-com-au/pact/wiki/Verifying-pacts#modifying-the-request-with-live-data
shamilton
2017-08-31 15:08
anybody know of others writing microservices in Elixir? our first Provider is being written in Elixir and the Consumer is a Ruby app.
matt
2017-08-31 21:09
I've heard rumors of an old colleague here in Melbourne, I'll look into it. It's doable if you use the provider verifier docker container
shamilton
2017-08-31 22:33
thanks @matt yeah we saw the provider verifier via Docker. definitely something we'll pursue at first. after that just wondering if there's an active project or any other contributors we can work with.
matt
2017-08-31 23:55
Great! I'm not sure where the last group got to, but if not far we'd be happy to see you up a repo on pact-foundation to get it started and a hangouts to take you through our recommended approach
kunwardeep
2017-09-01 00:55
@shamilton @matt I'd like to see that happen . We do have a fair few services in elixir, but tests are still end2end.
matt
2017-09-01 00:57
Hello! Well you guys were who I was going to approach. Shall we organise a hangouts next week some time and see what we can come up with? @kunwardeep @shamilton
kunwardeep
2017-09-01 00:59
sure @matt.. preferably during business hours . I am not an elixir person.. but willing to learn it
matt
2017-09-02 06:17
Hi @acooper106, if you?re not getting any output at all it?s going to be hard to diagnose! As a starting point, could you please raise an issue on the `pact-node` (https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-node/) javascript repository and we can track it there?
matt
2017-09-02 06:18
IIRC you are on Windows, so perhaps it?s a compatibility issue (we?re aware of some Windows issues, the cause of them and are working to resolve)
matt
2017-09-02 06:18
As discussed last time, perhaps a simple work around for the time being is to publish using the PoSH script (https://pactbroker.slack.com/archives/C47D4FGPR/p1499255790852938)
beth
2017-09-02 07:18
Oh, I see what you mean. The app is abstracted. You can set up the proxy yourself if you want to verify a running app. I'll send you some sample code.
beth
2017-09-02 09:47
I've added an example showing how to modify a request before replaying it https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-provider-proxy/commit/07b58e244b3687c90b2191ac45788eb98c794c08
beth
2017-09-02 09:48
Note the check to ensure that the original value of the header matches the expected format.
beth
2017-09-02 09:49
Are you sure you want to use the provider-proxy? If you have a ruby app, you'd be better off using the normal provider verifier, and if you don't have a ruby app, you'd be better off using the pact provider verifier https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-provider-verifier
beth
2017-09-05 05:56
who is using webhooks? I'm adding webhook statuses to the index page, and I'd like some beta users to give feedback.
thadir
2017-09-05 08:23
@beth were not sure yet, i havent had the chance to look at them. But were thinking of using it to use it when a consuemr publishes a contract to triger the provider.
thadir
2017-09-05 08:34
@beth, atm im realy focusing on getting the teams to use pact. Ill look in to it but my time is a bit close :slightly_smiling_face: but ill will try
shamilton
2017-09-05 12:41
sorry just saw this. yeah i could do a hangout. this week is a little crazy. we got Elixir conf. in Seattle
shamilton
2017-09-05 12:44
i'll be available again Sept. 14, or 15. though I could squeeze in a quick call today.
shamilton
2017-09-05 13:11
ok. so about a 15 hour difference then. well i could do either late at night or early in the morning. i do have some coworkers that would like to join too.
shashidesai
2017-09-06 19:15
I was curious to know how people are using the webhooks ? Is it possible to see some examples ?
kunwardeep
2017-09-07 00:47
has anyone had any experience in testing event/queue based system using some kind of contract based testing. The scenario is System A writes to a database/queue a job to be done. System B monitors this and if there is a new job, picks up the request and processes it. For us to test this we need an end 2 end system. But was wondering if some one had any experience in implementing some contact based testing for such a platform. The idea would be something similar as pact.
abubics
2017-09-07 00:49
I haven?t, personally, but @rholshausen has been talking about it a bunch recently
abubics
2017-09-07 00:50
Pact isn?t specifically for testing http interfaces, that?s just one transport that?s implemented
beth
2017-09-07 01:03
Ron is able to publish a blog post about this. We'll post it here when it's public.
beth
2017-09-10 21:50
I've created an issue for it here https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-specification/issues/42
beth
2017-09-11 01:58
@shashidesai Webhook are used to kick of provider builds when a new version of a pact is published
beth
2017-09-11 02:00
There is some documentation and an example here: https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact_broker/blob/master/lib/pact_broker/doc/views/webhooks.markdown
beth
2017-09-11 10:53
I've updated your broker @mouser. All the webhooks now say "not run" because the amount of work to migrate the old data structure was not worth it, but they'll be accurate once you've triggered the next execution. @rholshausen
thadir
2017-09-12 09:17
@beth how are the things going with the securety part? I still have one super user for em all, witch is a bit scary seeing some of my developers are a bit eager in there clean ujp.
beth
2017-09-12 09:59
Slowly :-( I'm out on client site, so I only get time to work on the broker on the train.
matt
2017-09-12 11:13
@thadir would having multiple brokers help you as a shorter term solution? We'd happily create you others if that's the case (I know, it's not ideal)
thadir
2017-09-12 14:16
@matt nah, its more like a thing that process wise is a problem. ATM working on some mock inprovmetns for the UI
abubics
2017-09-13 00:50
feedback on provider verifications: `pact-jvm-provider-gradle` automatically verifies (if using broker pactfiles), so I didn?t even have to change anything :stuck_out_tongue:
abubics
2017-09-13 01:10
there is a risk of people running `pactVerify` with local code changes, and the CI build still being broken . . . but that?s kinda always a risk
rholshausen
2017-09-13 01:12
I set the version to 0 in the build, so the local builds will always be the oldest. Bit of a hack, but it seems to work
abubics
2017-09-13 02:09
ah . . . guess I?ll hit more interesting cases soon . . . looking at versions, the only one I can find is `1-SNAPSHOT` :stuck_out_tongue: maybe something to fix
beth
2017-09-13 02:14
Ron, I'm moving to a timebased approach, because the ordering by version seems to cause more problems than it solves. So this approach might break.
beth
2017-09-13 02:17
Andras, I recommend using some flag based on an env variable that is only set on the ci
abubics
2017-09-13 02:18
yep, I think that?s what we?ve got on CI, I?m not sure where the `SNAPSHOT` is coming from on local, but I?ll hunt it down soon
beth
2017-09-13 02:20
@rholshausen what do you think? Two step process on the consumer and the provider?
rholshausen
2017-09-13 04:03
Hmm, I've just only finished implementing the verification stuff, and you want to change it :disappointed:
abubics
2017-09-13 04:14
I don?t think semver should be a problem . . . but highlighting when people may be causing inadvertent issues might go a long way
beth
2017-09-13 04:17
The asymmetry of the configuration bothered me when I wrote it, but for some reason it didn't occur to me to make a task for it in the ruby.
beth
2017-09-13 04:18
If the verification was written to a file in between the tests and the publication, it would need the url to post it to to be stored as well, as this is dynamic.
beth
2017-09-13 04:19
The task would also have to have access to the credentials set in the code that fetched the pact.
beth
2017-09-13 04:19
It does get a bit trickier, because all that context would need to be maintained
abubics
2017-09-14 04:29
yeah, auto (in the same task) is the easiest for configuration, as long as everything is following conventino
abubics
2017-09-14 04:50
Is there a way to list the pact versions of a consumer-provider pair in the broker? I can?t find anything in the HAL browser
abubics
2017-09-14 04:51
(I was having an issue where `1-SNAPSHOT` was uploaded and verified, so I couldn?t see any of the `0.0.740` etc versions)
abubics
2017-09-14 04:54
right, so I can manually type
```
https://<account>.http://pact.dius.com.au/hal-browser/browser.html#https://<account>.pact.dius.com.au/pacts/provider/<provider>/consumer/<consumer>/versions
```
but I couldn?t find a link to that through the HAL browser
abubics
2017-09-14 04:55
pro-tip, the link is in `https://<account>.http://pact.dius.com.au/hal-browser/browser.html#https://<account>.pact.dius.com.au/pacts/provider/<provider>/consumer/<consumer>`
beth
2017-09-14 05:28
I'll put an "all pact versions" relation on the pact resource if it's not there already
d.van.dijk
2017-09-18 09:53
I have a unittest that runs with PactRunner.
When I use "failIfNoPactsFound = false", I get
java.lang.Exception: Did not find any pact files for provider security-api-system-users
When I use "@IgnoreNoPactsToVerify", I get
au.com.dius.pact.provider.junit.loader.NoPactsFoundException: No consumer pacts were found for provider <provider> and tag 'null'. (URL [])
Only when I use both, I get the desired result
WARN PactRunner uopId= - Did not find any pact files for provider
d.van.dijk
2017-09-18 13:46
By the way. This happens on
pact-jvm-provider-junit_2.11 3.5.3,
pact-jvm-provider-junit_2.11 3.5.5 and
pact-jvm-provider-junit_2.12 3.5.5
rholshausen
2017-09-18 23:09
@d.van.dijk I'll have a look, with the `@IgnoreNoPactsToVerify` annotation your test should not fail
beth
2017-09-18 23:32
@mouser @fergusstrange @abubics the webhook status feature has been deployed. You'll now see a "last run" time in the webhook status column. If the webhook fails, you'll be able to click through and find the logs from the failing webhook (there will be a link relation called "pb:error-logs")
beth
2017-09-18 23:33
One thing that's missing is some indication that a webhook did NOT run because the pact hadn't changed. Therefore, you may see that the last pact was published more recently than the webhook fired. I'm not sure how to show this, and would welcome feedback.
abubics
2017-09-19 02:20
bad news for us, I?m afraid . . . we?ve got internal-only IPs for TeamCity, so webhooks can?t even route :disappointed:
abubics
2017-09-19 03:35
not easily . . . but this will lead to upgrading the (2+ year-) old internal broker, I hope
abubics
2017-09-19 04:30
you know what might be cool (if not difficult) . . . some visual indicator in the HTML pact page that shows if an interaction has changed (or been added) since the last version of a pact
beth
2017-09-19 04:46
go into the hal browser, and then select the "pb:diff-previous-distinct" relation.
abubics
2017-09-19 04:52
ah cool . . . I was wondering what those links did :stuck_out_tongue: they didn?t show anything when we had the same pact uploaded 14 times :joy:
beth
2017-09-19 04:54
the annoying thing is that pact jvm uses a lot of randomly generated data, so there's going to be a lot of noise.
matt
2017-09-19 04:55
You can avoid the random data though, you just need to make sure you supply the examples rather than rely on the Pact lib to do it
alexei
2017-09-20 09:03
Hello! I have a problem with hosted (.au) Pact Broker.
There are several PACTs published, the most of them working (seemingly) as intended.
But one particular PACT doesn't get updated in Web UI when republishing. Response 200, everything in response looks just fine.
Just changing the name of e.g. Provider with exactly the same data - everything works fine with it.
alexei
2017-09-20 09:07
@alexei uploaded a file: https://pact-foundation.slack.com/files/UB86JHVRB/FB7FQGA7K/response_status_200_js
alexei
2017-09-20 09:09
It looks like the record dosen't not updated despite of this response that update was successful (200). Server side bug? Looking for your help, thanks.
alexei
2017-09-20 09:34
Update. https://grenke.pact.dius.com.au/pacts/provide/<provider>/consumer/<consumer>/versions - shows all the updates. But Web UI doesn't show the latest...
alexei
2017-09-20 09:43
Update 2. https://grenke.pact.dius.com.au/pacts/provide/<provider>/consumer/<consumer>/latest returns that wrong version back (what is definition of "latest"?) which is then shown in WebUI, and
https://grenke.pact.dius.com.au/pacts/provide/<provider>/consumer/<consumer>/latest-untagged shows the latest-request version.
beth
2017-09-20 09:44
I think it's because the semantic version gem is incorrectly parsing the version.
alexei
2017-09-20 09:45
Correction. While playing, the most versions are like x.y.z.f but some are just x.y.z
beth
2017-09-20 09:45
Someone submitted a PR to change the parsing, and it had unexpected consequences.
beth
2017-09-20 09:51
Ok, try republishing now. It should order by date. You'll need to publish new versions as the existing versions already have an order assigned to them.
beth
2017-09-20 09:52
If you've just been messing around, delete the consumer, and all the pacts will be removed with it.
alexei
2017-09-20 10:00
There is some more infos, and questions.
Q. I could not figure out, what is the API call for publishing with a tag?
alexei
2017-09-20 10:01
I've just published a version 2.0.0.5 with a tag, then the same with a changed pact.
beth
2017-09-20 10:02
It's not really designed for republishing with the same number, however, it should still work, so I'll look into it.
beth
2017-09-20 10:02
Can you send me the instructions to recreate the issue, and I'll have a look at it as soon as I can (night time in Australia)
alexei
2017-09-20 10:05
:thumbsup: Yes, sure. I am using .NET Client and Postman in parallel. Hope to find out how to tag with Postman Reqs (to eliminate problems with the framework)
alexei
2017-09-20 10:06
there are examples for Ruby (or of cause I can use .NET) but I still did not found right format for plain old HTTP Calls
beth
2017-09-20 10:07
As an example, to tag Foo consumer version 2.3.0 as the production version, do a PUT to the resource /pacticipants/Foo/versions/2.3.0/tags/prod.
alexei
2017-09-20 10:09
I can then basically only tags consumer/version? (provider/version) combinations?
beth
2017-09-20 10:10
Because the tag applies to all pacts of that version eg. Production, Master, Development
alexei
2017-09-20 10:12
> Note that the tag is actually placed on the consumer version resource, not the pact itself (conceptually, you are indicating that that particular version of the consumer application is a "prod" version, or a "feature-a" version). The URL structures, however, then allow you to retrieve pacts by the tags on their associated versions.
beth
2017-09-21 22:43
@alexei how did you go? Have you got the steps to recreate your issue worked out? Please raise an issue on the pact broker repository when you do.
alok.pandey
2017-09-25 11:01
i have my pact files ready.....i wanted to know what happens at provider side ?
beth
2017-09-25 11:03
Hi @alok.pandey. Have a read of this https://docs.pact.io/documentation/verifying_pacts.html
alok.pandey
2017-09-25 11:34
Hi @beth i need to publish my pact file to the free broker--- $res = Invoke-WebRequest -Uri "https://royalcyber.pact.dius.com.au/" -Method Put -C:\Users\user\Documents\WORKSPACE\microservice1\target\pacts\test_consumer-test_provider.json -ContentType "application/json" is it right or else what should i do?
beth
2017-09-25 11:37
Scroll down to the .net section https://docs.pact.io/documentation/sharings_pacts.html#language-support
beth
2017-09-25 11:38
Can I recommend you browse the pact docs site to get a feel for all the documentation? It won't take long, and it should answer most queries that will come up.
beth
2017-09-25 11:39
It useful having some new eyes over it to let us know what is missing or could be improved.
matt
2017-09-26 05:52
For the Java/JVM users out there, our very own @rholshausen just published a neat little article on contract testing serverless and async applications with Pact: https://dius.com.au/2017/09/22/contract-testing-serverless-and-asynchronous-applications/
alok.pandey
2017-09-26 14:59
Hi @beth i am trying to upload files to pact broker.... The remote server returned an error: (405) Method Not Allowed.....could u please tell the issue?
alexei
2017-09-28 10:15
Hi Beth, it is postponed, because we have unfortunately other problems with consumer test itself. My first impression after that day, I?ve used the broker is, that Broker API should not offer tags parameter for ?publish pact? operation at all, because it is designed, that tag is consumer-version related, and not pact related. Parameter in publishPact is then misleading.
I?m afraid, I can go into it in depth in the next week at earliest.
beth
2017-10-02 04:15
Open the latest pact (or /latest-untagged or /latest/TAG) in your browser, and click on the badge icon to display the markdown to add to your README.
beth
2017-10-02 04:18
@alexei you are tagging the consumer version (ie. you are saying version 1.2.3 is the production version, or 3.4.5 is the master version) however, the tags are used for looking up the pacts. To get the pact for the latest production version between Foo and Bar, you use `/pacts/provider/Bar/consumer/Foo/latest/production`
beth
2017-10-02 04:21
The reason the version is tagged and not the pact is that 1. the tag "production" should apply to all pacts that belong to version "1.2.3" of the consumer. It doesn't make sense to have the production version of the pact with provider-1 being at version "1.2.3" and the production version of the pact with provider-2 being at version "4.5.6"
beth
2017-10-02 04:22
2. It allows you to tag provider versions as well, which is used when we want to indicate that a provider has been released to production. This will allow us to know whether a pact is compatible with the _production_ version of a provider, not just the development version.
alok.pandey
2017-10-04 11:33
i am using maven plugin in the provider side so i have given my databse url in <stateChangeUrl>....so does the provider runs all the services in pact file with this url?
alok.pandey
2017-10-06 09:16
@beth yeah its working thanks again.....actually i have one doubt suppose we have to set up the datasource in the consumer side then what should we do?
beth
2017-10-09 03:15
Do you mean, how to do you set up your data for the consumer side of the pact test? Just the way you normally would for any test.
beth
2017-10-09 03:16
It's best to test just the client code using pact ie. put all the code that makes the calls to the provider into one class, and just test that class. If you start using pact to test your entire consumer stack, you tend to get bloated and hard to maintain tests.
nic
2017-10-09 13:02
quick request for help, I'm getting a 401 on my provider when I run rake pact:verify
nic
2017-10-09 13:03
I have env vars set for my username/password and can see them being passed into pact helper
nic
2017-10-09 13:03
if I copy the url it says its trying to access from the console into my browser it works fine
thadir
2017-10-09 13:10
@nic question is it maven based or other language in what lang is the provider?
nic
2017-10-09 13:14
thanks @thadir its ruby, don't worry I found it in the docs eventually! https://github.com/realestate-com-au/pact/wiki/Verifying-pacts#with-basic-auth
thadir
2017-10-09 13:15
np, most of the pact folks are from Australia so time zone is a thing here :wink:.
nic
2017-10-09 13:15
yeah realised that - thought I'd chuck it in anyway and eventually somebody would read it
thadir
2017-10-09 13:17
Welp im in a EU time zone but use mostly the Java + JavaScript so yeah cant help you a 100% but the docs help
beth
2017-10-09 20:26
Yeah, sorry @nic, we were all asleep. Thanks @thadir. Glad you found an answer. If you can't find something in the docs, please let us know so we can add it.
thadir
2017-10-10 15:34
before I forget (we had a great discusion about contract testing here :)) and one question I could not answer was well when somone asked when will the "beta" period end and when will we switch to a subscription and what pricing model will be used.
There were also some discussion how to handle contracts ouside the span of your controll. When you start making a public API, we like the idea of the HAL browser and the insight the broker gives us. But we do not like the idea of some unkown force breaking our builds.
alexei
2017-10-16 12:48
Using Pact .NET Framework (which contain Ruby HTTP/S Engine?), I got the error message, when retrieving the PACT File for Provider verification.
```
Error reading file from https://xxx.pact.dius.com.au/pacts/provider/yyyy/consumer/zzzz/latest
SSL_connect returned=1 errno=0 state=SSLv3 read server certificate B: certificate verify failed C:/pact-win32/lib/ruby/lib/ruby/2.2.0/net/http.rb:923:in `connect'
```
alexei
2017-10-16 12:57
I found in pact-win32 ruby directory a ca-bundle.crt which is referenced by some config files of ruby, and which ist expired in 2015?.
alexei
2017-10-16 17:10
Solved: the environment blocked access to SSL certificates validation, Turned off SSL Certificate validation in Code for this to work. Probably an option (don?t check SSL Certificates for validity) for that could be helpful for some projects.
abubics
2017-10-16 22:31
don?t you ideally want the opposite of that? i.e. stop blocking cert validation
alexei
2017-10-17 09:01
@abubics I guess in many of test environments self-signed certificates are very common. Pact would not be able to work with the broker and (probably, did not check yet) internal https services this way.
beth
2017-10-17 09:04
@alexei glad you've fixed it, but I'm not sure why you've encountered this problem at this time. I wonder if it's a windows specific error. Is this the first time you've run this code on windows?
alexei
2017-10-17 17:15
no, it?s environment specific (I mean, restrictive firewalls here). Like if I execute - ?curl https://amazon.com? - SSL Certificate Error is returned.
It is not very common for small companies, but could happen at large enterprises.
alexei
2017-10-17 17:26
in my ConsumerTest the mock is doesn?t generate concrete values, though, so that assertion:
assert mockService.method().count > 1 fails (.count is 0)
alexei
2017-10-17 17:45
```
Body= new {
entities = PactNet.Matchers.Match.MinType(
new {
properties = new {
id = PactNet.Matchers.Match.Type("id"),
description = PactNet.Matchers.Match.Type("desc")
}
}, 2)
}
```
alexei
2017-10-17 17:46
Pact file:
```
"body": {
"entities": [
{
"properties": {
"id": "id",
"description": "desc"
}
},
{
"properties": {
"id": "id",
"description": "desc"
}
}
]
},
"matchingRules": {
"$.body.entities": {
"min": 2
},
"$.body.entities[*].*": {
"match": "type"
},
"$.body.entities[*].properties.id": {
"match": "type"
},
"$.body.entities[*].properties.description": {
"match": "type"
}
}
}
```
alexei
2017-10-17 17:48
actually expected, that
```
"entities": [
{
"properties": {
"id": "id",
"description": "desc"
}
},
{
"properties": {
"id": "id",
"description": "desc"
}
}
]
}
```
will be returned by mock? Okay will try to debug a bit, ideas are welcomed. If I hardcore the exact two elements in Pact, then mock if returning them just fine.
eskimoquinn
2017-10-17 20:17
@beth was either my suggestion or your suggestion something that was ever implemented? If so can you point me to the version?
alexei
2017-10-18 12:25
Guess what. It wasn?t Pact Bug, it was a Pact feature! Response should have had another parameter, which I thought is not related to this pact, but it actually was! So that Consumer UnitTests failed with the right reason, perfect Pact job!
alexei
2017-10-18 12:29
The next hurdle. I want to UnitTest the Consumer method `doSmthWithServiceResponse()`, which looks reasonable at the moment. This method calls the Service (or Pact Mock in our case) and does a bit more with its response.
alexei
2017-10-18 12:31
Response has an ?entities?-array (above) - and the UnitTest fails, as ?postprocessing? of response requires that id-s (above) are different.
alexei
2017-10-18 12:33
so instead of
```
"entities": [
{
"properties": {
"id": "id",
"description": "desc"
}
},
{
"properties": {
"id": "id",
"description": "desc"
}
}
]
}
```
I would need:
```
"entities": [
{
"properties": {
"id": "id1",
"description": "desc"
}
},
{
"properties": {
"id": "id2",
"description": "desc"
}
}
]
}
```
to be returned. How (and if) I can implement that in Pact?
alexei
2017-10-18 13:45
https://github.com/SEEK-Jobs/pact-net/issues/117 - basically the same, but simpler example
thadir
2017-10-19 10:52
A col fact for PACT users consumer driven contact testing is back on the ThoughtWorks techradar
jsilver
2017-10-19 18:12
Hey All, I'm integrating Pact testing and have a question: Let say I'm writing a contract to retrieve `zoo/cats/:id` and that contract expects the cat to have exactly 2 stripes, one blue eye, and one green eye. If our provider generates this exact cat, but with a nondeterministic ID, how can the consumer know which id to include in the request when generating a pact?
abubics
2017-10-20 04:32
Generally, you would set up whatever entities in the state pre-step.
So, if the state is `special cat (2 stripes, blue eye, green eye)` you would make sure to set your data to have the expected ID, too.
abubics
2017-10-20 04:34
it?s probably more useful to generalise on the shape of the data, and only be so specific about data you?re explicitly setting
abubics
2017-10-20 04:35
like, if you have an endpoint that returns some of the data you send it, you could make sure that the response has the same literals
matt
2017-10-20 07:12
@jsilver typically you'll have a standard test data fixture for the provider which will have these entities created already.
kevin.meiresonne
2017-10-26 11:56
Hi, I just found you can configure how to compare pact versions on https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact_broker/wiki/Configuration
Is there a way I can change the version parser of a hosted pact broker at Dius?
eskimoquinn
2017-10-26 15:03
@matt is it possible to change values in the request before the call is made to the provider in the provider verification? I cannot create ids on the system that that I am verifiying, so the typical way to set of the provider states will not work for me.
eskimoquinn
2017-10-26 15:42
that is, we have a rest service that sits on top of a read only database, therefore we cannot create records with specific IDS. So ideally the consumer would supply a provider state, which we then could create a record of the id stated in the example from the PACT. However, we cannot do that because of the read only limitation. Can we change the request to put in another ID before the pact verification?
matt
2017-10-27 05:57
Hi @kevin.meiresonne, it can be done. Let us know offline and we'll set it for you.
matt
2017-10-27 05:58
You could in Java using request filters. What language are you again? If the values are known / static in the provider, why not just update the consumer tests with those values?
kevin.meiresonne
2017-10-27 09:39
I only find how to do it on a version
e.g.
/verification-results/consumer/{consumer}/version/{consumerApplicationVersion}/latest
eskimoquinn
2017-10-27 13:43
In this case, we are using ruby. For the second question, we did end up doing what you suggest but it increased the coordination needed between the consuming team the providing team, which while that works, its not ideal.
eskimoquinn
2017-10-27 15:06
@beth, @matt et. al. We are using the pact-provider-proxy gem and we would like to publish our verification results to the pact broker. However, when we set up our pact_helper to include the app_version and the publish_verification_results boolean, we get an error that indicates that our rack config is missing (http://config.ru). Is this a bug, or do we have something configured incorrectly? Also the tests do not run, yet it still sends a verification to the pact broker. Something seems amiss here.
matt
2017-10-27 21:35
Verification is still sent to broker on test failure, the status is different though (ie. A failure instead if a success)
matt
2017-10-27 21:36
Did you create a http://config.ru as the error suggested? (I'm just shooting in the dark here..)
matt
2017-10-27 21:37
@kevin.meiresonne I'm not sure if it does yet. @beth might know. We have something cooking on the horizon that will help in that space though
beth
2017-10-31 03:57
I haven't actually looked at the proxy gem for ages, as most people use the provider-verifier gem instead. The main difference between the two is that the proxy gem requires the provider states to be declared in a ruby file, where as the provider-verifier changes the states by hitting a url.
beth
2017-10-31 04:00
ok, I've had a look at the code. with the proxy gem, you should be configuring a rake task, not a service_provider block. You're overriding the default service provider configuration, which is why it's complaining about not finding the http://config.ru. the app_version and the publish_verification_results flag haven't been exposed in the rake task interface yet. I'll add them now.
beth
2017-10-31 04:30
@kevin.meiresonne I'm working querying verifications by tag at the moment. You can find this information currently but it takes a few calls. Have a look at this issue: https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact_broker/issues/141
beth
2017-10-31 04:32
@eskimoquinn I believe this feature will be available in the future, when we move to a shared rust implementation.
beth
2017-10-31 04:44
I've also almost got a version of the index page that has the prod tag info on it, but the person asking for it stopped responding to me, so I've let it drop.
beth
2017-10-31 05:04
@eskimoquinn I've put out a new version of the provider-proxy gem with the new fields in the rake task.
kevin.meiresonne
2017-10-31 08:43
@beth Thanks for the update. I've been sharing some information with @matt on how we intend to use the broker, with some feature requests on the UI dashboard side. Happy to challenge what you've been working on on the index page :slightly_smiling_face:
beth
2017-10-31 09:33
There is a repositoryUrl available on the pacticipant resource. That's been in there since day 1, I'm surprised I didn't remember it.
beth
2017-10-31 10:08
I've updated the code to allow the repositoryUrl to be set, will deploy it some time in the next few days.
beth
2017-10-31 22:27
@kevin.meiresonne there is an alpha feature in the broker now that shows you the "matrix" of pacts and verifications. The URL is /matrix/provider/PROVIDER/consumer/CONSUMER
beth
2017-11-01 01:04
Ok broker users, I have a new feature for you to beta. I haven't had time to give it a good shakeout yet, but I'm putting it out there because a few people have been asking for a similar thing, so I'll put it out and see how it goes. It's a tool set that allows you to check the verification results before you deploy a consumer.
beth
2017-11-01 01:04
Grab yourself a copy of the pact broker CLI from here: https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-ruby-standalone/releases/tag/v1.16.0
beth
2017-11-01 01:05
Here are the usage instructions:
```
Usage:
pact-broker can-i-deploy -a, --pacticipant=PACTICIPANT -b, --broker-base-url=BROKER_BASE_URL
Options:
-a, --pacticipant=PACTICIPANT # The pacticipant name. Use once for each pacticipant being checked.
-e, [--version=VERSION] # The pacticipant version. Must be entered after the --pacticipant that it relates to.
-l, [--latest=[TAG]] # Use the latest pacticipant version. Optionally specify a TAG to use the latest version with the specified tag.
-b, --broker-base-url=BROKER_BASE_URL # The base URL of the Pact Broker
-u, [--broker-username=BROKER_USERNAME] # Pact Broker basic auth username
-p, [--broker-password=BROKER_PASSWORD] # Pact Broker basic auth password
-o, [--output=OUTPUT] # json or table
# Default: table
-v, [--verbose], [--no-verbose] # Verbose output. Default: false
Returns exit code 0 or 1, indicating whether or not the specified application versions are compatible.
```
beth
2017-11-01 01:06
Here is an example of a query using the test broker (you can all play around with the data in there):
```
./pact-broker can-i-deploy --pacticipant "Foo Web Client" --version 1.0.2 --pacticipant "Activity Service" --latest --broker-base-url https://test.pact.dius.com.au --broker-username dXfltyFMgNOFZAxr8io9wJ37iUpY42M --broker-password O5AIZWxelWbLvqMd8PkAVycBJh2Psyg1
Computer says no ¯\_(?)_/¯
CONSUMER | CONSUMER_VERSION | PROVIDER | PROVIDER_VERSION | SUCCESS
---------------|------------------|------------------|------------------|--------
Foo Web Client | 1.0.2 | Activity Service | 1.0.1 | false
One or more verifications have failed
```
beth
2017-11-01 01:07
@kevin.meiresonne you can specify the version for the latest tag also by doing `--pacticipant PACTICIPANT --latest TAG`
beth
2017-11-01 01:12
For use in conjunction with the above tool, there is a `pact-broker create-version-tag` command.
```
Usage:
pact-broker create-version-tag -a, --pacticipant=PACTICIPANT -b, --broker-base-url=BROKER_BASE_URL -e, --version=VERSION
Options:
-a, --pacticipant=PACTICIPANT # The pacticipant name
-e, --version=VERSION # The pacticipant version
-t, [--tag=TAG] # Tag name for pacticipant version. Can be specified multiple times.
-g, [--tag-with-git-branch], [--no-tag-with-git-branch] # Tag pacticipant version with the name of the current git branch. Default: false
-b, --broker-base-url=BROKER_BASE_URL # The base URL of the Pact Broker
-u, [--broker-username=BROKER_USERNAME] # Pact Broker basic auth username
-p, [--broker-password=BROKER_PASSWORD] # Pact Broker basic auth password
-v, [--verbose], [--no-verbose] # Verbose output. Default: false
Add a tag to a pacticipant version
```
beth
2017-11-01 01:15
The recommended usage of these tools would be to tag the pacticipant version every time it is deployed to a stage (dev|test|staging|production) so that you don't have to know the exact version of the other services, but can refer to them as `--latest TAG` eg `--latest prod`
beth
2017-11-01 01:16
eg. on deploy of any pacticipant to prod `pact-broker create-version-tag --pacticipant Foo --version ${VERSION} --tag prod ...`
beth
2017-11-01 01:18
before deploy of a consumer to prod `pact-broker can-i-deploy --pacticipant "Foo Consumer" --version ${VERSION} --pacticipant "Foo" --latest prod`
beth
2017-11-01 01:22
Let me know if you have any questions, and what you think of it if you try it. It's just in dark release, so there's plenty of room for any necessary changes.
thadir
2017-11-01 09:47
@beth this looks interesting, we could use this in buildpipes like Jenkins to validate if somting can work in production. But this means the taging interface needs some TLC
thadir
2017-11-01 09:49
Nope you got updated, it helps that the microservice comuniety is loving it, im going to talk about it in a dutch tech meat up soon :slightly_smiling_face:. It has some downside as its a tool for a process and a mind set and when its not fully adapted there are a few snags.
jsilver
2017-11-01 19:09
I've been experiencing a flakey pact test while running tests in CircleCI. The Pact Server fails to boot, and throws an ` ECONNREFUSED`. I am yet to experience this locally but it's come up quite a bit while running in Circle. We're using `pact-js` and `jest`. Anyone seen this before?
matt
2017-11-01 20:11
@jsilver I haven?t seen that, no. My guess is that perhaps there is a race condition with starting the server and it being available for the jest test. I don?t know Jest very well, does it run in the browser?
matt
2017-11-01 20:12
it?s possible jest thinks the server is up, and the pact tests start (which involves sending http requests to the server). If the server is not yet available on the port that could cause that error
matt
2017-11-01 21:20
hi all, sorry for the interruption! We are looking to get some testimonials about Pact and the Broker from our most loyal users - you!
We?d like to put this on our website and other marketing collateral going forward, so you?ll practically be famous...
Whilst we appreciate any feedback, here are some options to consider, in descending order of complexity/effort:
1. Record a video hangouts type thing with a Q & A style interaction (we could obviously somewhat prepare this in advance)
2. Written case study (e.g. The tech stack, the environment, number of services etc. and how Pact and, ideally, the broker, was critical to your success)
3. Guest blog post type thing
4. Brief testimonial e.g. ?We use pact to move faster, safer? blah blah blah at <your organisation>? - <name> <title>
Oh, and did I mention that we?ll be speaking at the popular YOW! Tech conference in Australia (Melbourne, Brisbane and Sydney) on Integration Testing strategies in early December? We?ll have a marketing campaign built around this that will likely include this material which could be great brand exposure.
If this interests you, please contact me offline or drop me a note a .
jsilver
2017-11-02 20:56
Hey @matt, that's what we figured was happening. We're wondering if there's some kind of health check endpoint we can wait on to check the status of the server. I see that this package is deprecated, but it looks like there was some chatter on this issue: https://github.com/DiUS/pact-consumer-js-dsl/issues/32
matt
2017-11-02 22:14
You don?t really need a health check endpoint, simply knowing the port is available is all that is required - when the port is up, the service is up
beth
2017-11-02 22:58
@jsilver you can poll the root url with the header 'X-Pact-Mock-Service: true' and once the mock service is up, it will return a 200.
beth
2017-11-02 23:00
Yup. I've been adding the tags to both the pact publishing and verifying code so that it's all done as part of the normal process. In regards to the tagging CLI `pact-broker create-version-tag`, what features would you like to see?
beth
2017-11-02 23:20
So you can check the port any way you like. I've just tended to poll until that HTTP response came back 200 because otherwise you get an error response in the logs.
beth
2017-11-02 23:21
I guess you could do a tcp connection without actually making a response as well.
thadir
2017-11-03 13:29
@beth, sure ill do that later today when i have some time to explain this prity Java, C# process. For full automated release processes.
jsilver
2017-11-06 19:39
Hey @ and @, I'm still trying to debug the non-deterministic pact server failures and came across something interesting. Our `integration.log` shows the correct flow for the each test in the suite (interaction registered, request received, matching request found, interaction verified). However, the test fails with a Jasmine timeout error. We are using `pact-js` and Jest.
jsilver
2017-11-06 19:48
It appears that the above error has to do with the resolution of promises in the pact-js code. I'm looking into it further, but would appreciate any directional guidance
matt
2017-11-06 22:34
@jsilver I might be able to look a little later today, a PR would be most welcome if you can track it down. Thanks for your digging this far
matt
2017-11-07 12:10
@jsilver any chance you could please create an issue to track this on the `pact-js` repo? + Ideally a repro
alexei
2017-11-07 12:17
Using .NET Pact Framework, is there any feature for choosing arbitrary free port for the mocks, built-in in the framework?
The reason is, that when some CI Jobs running in parallel for different services, ports collision is possible when the ports are hard-coded.
kevin.meiresonne
2017-11-07 13:42
not that I'm aware of, but it's pretty easy to implement that yourself.
kevin.meiresonne
2017-11-07 13:45
This is how we do it: https://gist.github.com/anonymous/7276caa109c3ac42c66283be9fca813e
jsilver
2017-11-07 15:27
@matt, I created an issue that includes the test file, and two log files as gists: https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-js/issues/124. Thanks again for the help!
matt
2017-11-07 20:16
I?m not sure, sorry @alexei. You might need to ask on the Pact Net repo where Neil can answer (not sure he?s on here)
thadir
2017-11-08 10:49
We see this at random happen so now and then. If we kick the build ofthen enogh it will work. But it seems there are some small bugs. I cant see the brokers logging. But me thinks we found somting rare.
matt
2017-11-08 14:01
Is it common to have one broker for the entire company? Or should each team have a dedicated broker?
thadir
2017-11-08 14:06
@matt depens how you want to do it. We disided to use a broker for the whole company internal. So we all can see how things are tied and dependent. But were also going to as soon as we get a good feeling make a broker to help our clients to connect to get the full API structure of our clients depended on our API's in chart.
matt
2017-11-08 14:13
I'm wondering if the UI gets a bit messy with many pact files and no way to organize them.
kevin.meiresonne
2017-11-08 14:16
The current pact broker UI only shows the latest versions of the different pacts, so I think that's manageable. How many pacts does your company have (how many service to service dependencies?)
matt
2017-11-08 14:19
is there an option to pay for a professionally hosted broker? if so, is there pricing info available?
thadir
2017-11-08 14:48
@matt yeah it gets a bit clutterd. But the UI is the leaset of my concerns.. The test are the things im interested in and were starting to use the badges that @beth implemented a while back so they can see if its ok. The UI is more a thing we use to have the talk how our eco system looks like.
thadir
2017-11-08 14:55
That will happen, there realy working on it. But there other concerns for now :slightly_smiling_face:. And still there doing a splended job in givin support
thadir
2017-11-08 14:56
just wished they would tell me when the beta was going to end. I sort of need to get time to arrange the money for the tool We realy want to pay it so they can even focus more on it.
matt
2017-11-08 14:57
yeah, I'd be happy to pay. Especially if that means features get developed faster
matt
2017-11-08 15:03
https://www.couponbirds.com/codes/dius.com.au?key=1917659195975
haha. I found a coupon.
andrew.nicholson
2017-11-09 20:44
Hello! I have a question about the pact-provider-proxy gem. Is there any way to get it to output a report file that could be read by a Jenkins job? I have Jenkins running my pact verification tasks, and would love to see the verification failures surfaced in the Jenkins interface.
andrew.nicholson
2017-11-09 20:47
Rspec tests are able to produce Junit output XML, which works perfectly -- is there anything like that?
matt
2017-11-09 20:57
Is there any reason why you?re using the `pact-provider-proxy` gem in the first place?
matt
2017-11-09 20:58
but the short answer (from me) is I?m not sure, but if not I think we would like to support this sort of thing
andrew.nicholson
2017-11-09 21:35
So, we're using the `pact-provider-proxy` gem in order to have our pact verification run against an external URL -- we aren't using a rack app. Is there something else we should be using for this purpose?
beth
2017-11-11 02:42
@andrew.nicholson use the pact-provider-verifier instead. There is an --format json option.
beth
2017-11-11 03:04
I've just added the --format RspecJunitFormatter option. You'll need pact-provider-verifier 1.10.0
matt
2017-11-11 05:50
@beth loving the JSON formatter on the verifier, we can now properly break down the provider tests in Go land and see specifically where things failed
beth
2017-11-13 02:17
@thadir @matt we wish we knew when the beta was going to end too! DiUS is a consulting company, not a product company, so we haven't had dedicated time in the past to work on it. This year should be different, as Pact and the Broker are becoming more central in DiUS' overall business plan.
beth
2017-11-13 02:18
The plan is to make Pact and Pact Broker development self funding, by charging for the features that will make pact work "at scale" (but still leaving the core product open source).
beth
2017-11-13 02:20
Talking of the open source product, somebody was wanting to view tags in the index page. I can't remember who it was. @kevin.meiresonne? I've just released this feature, and the documentation for it is here: https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact_broker/wiki/UI-Documentation
beth
2017-11-13 02:59
@matt in the backlog of features for the "pact at scale" version of the broker is proper authentication, authorization, user administration and permissions.
matt
2017-11-13 03:13
thanks. At work i've run into a bit of push back on using the DiUS hosted broker. The preference is for self hosted instances to minimize any security concerns.
matt
2017-11-13 03:14
has DiUS dealt with larger companies before that have a security review process for vendors?
matt
2017-11-13 03:15
i'm wondering if there's already some marketing style PDFs to help persuade decision makers about DiUS
beth
2017-11-13 03:15
We've probably been involved in reviews from the other side! But the broker hasn't gone through that yet. You raise an excellent point.
matt
2017-11-13 03:16
i was super excited when DiUS provisioned our broker since we'd be able to get started immediately with Pact and not have to maintain yet another server. the initial reaction however was who is DiUS and why should we trust them with any of our data
matt
2017-11-13 03:17
a bunch of our APIs are open source so they don't raise any security concerns. I'm starting there for now with the hosted broker, other teams have already started spinning up internal servers. I think having one broker per team though isn't a great use of resources.
beth
2017-11-13 03:18
Given that the point is to share contracts between teams, you do loose some of the value.
beth
2017-11-13 03:18
You really want all the contracts for each service to be in the same broker, otherwise the can-i-deploy tools won't work.
beth
2017-11-13 03:18
Or rather, you want all the services that talk to each other to use the same broker.
matt
2017-11-13 03:19
i love the idea of DiUS providing pact via software as a service. teams don't have to worry about server upgrades and can focus on testing. and then there'd be paid support available as well.
beth
2017-11-13 03:20
As in, if there are services that can be separated into groups that only talk internally, they could have their own broker. You'd lose value if you started spreading services that talked to each other across different brokers.
beth
2017-11-13 03:20
Exactly. Quite a few of the places where we have implemented pact are using old versions of the broker, and as it's moving quite quickly with feature addition at the moment, they're not getting the full value proposition out of pact.
beth
2017-11-13 03:21
As an example, the verification results and can-i-deploy tool (which I think are some of the most important features of the broker) have only been implemented in the last 6 months.
matt
2017-11-13 03:22
we are just getting started with pact. here's a simple example of how we're using it on one team via Ruby:
https://github.com/instructure/test_advisory_board/tree/master/pact
matt
2017-11-13 03:23
any idea what the consulting rate is for some high level advice? i think it'd save us a ton of time to have an expert explain the best use of Pact
beth
2017-11-13 03:24
It's a topic we like talking about, we're more than happy to do some consulting on it.
matt
2017-11-13 03:28
there are offices all over though: https://www.instructure.com/careers/openpositions
beth
2017-11-13 03:29
We're based in Melbourne, Australia, so there's the potential for us to do some online collaboration.
matt
2017-11-13 03:29
we're trying to figure out how to test APIs as we move to a microservices architecture. pact seems like an awesome fit.
matt
2017-11-13 03:29
https://github.com/instructure/canvas-lms :arrow_left: is the main project we're working on
beth
2017-11-13 03:30
I threw together this the other day if you're interested: https://docs.pact.io/about_pact/history.html
matt
2017-11-13 03:30
one nice thing about Instructure is a bunch of the software is open source, so it's a bit easier to collaborate.
matt
2017-11-13 03:31
rust isn't a language i have any experience with, i'm more familiar with golang.
matt
2017-11-13 03:32
we had a similar issue at work recently, trying to figure out how to share a common server across many different languages. ended up selecting gRPC
matt
2017-11-13 03:33
if we used C++ or some other low level language, that's a bit more difficult to find contributors for.
matt
2017-11-13 03:34
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1dgI09a-_4dwBMLyqfwchvS6iXtbcISQPLAXL6gSYOcc/edit#slide=id.g1c2bc22a4a_0_0
^ those are the google slides that explain the tech
matt
2017-11-13 03:34
I'm not sure if pact works with protocol buffers, GraphQL, or other more exotic API technologies.
beth
2017-11-13 03:35
No, it's not very exotic yet. HTTP for all implementations, and message support for JVM currently.
matt
2017-11-13 03:39
swagger + pact is also interesting, I wonder if there are any success stories with that approach beyond Atlassian.
beth
2017-11-13 03:39
I haven't actually used it myself yet, but you could try asking on the gitter channel.
matt
2017-11-13 03:50
we looked at a *ton* of options for reusing code across arbitrary languages :slightly_smiling_face:
matt
2017-11-13 03:51
i wish kotlin native was a bit further along in development, that seems like an interesting option.
matt
2017-11-13 06:51
@thadir @matt I know it wasn't necessarily what you meant, but I am here to assure you that beta doesn't mean we don't take responsibility of your data and the platform seriously. We do.
matt
2017-11-13 06:53
As Beth mentioned, things are starting to move and we should have more traction coming into the new year. All going to plan I'll have some dedicated time in my schedule permanently on improving and growing this product. We do really appreciate your patience in the meanwhile
matt
2017-11-13 06:54
One thing we could be better at is publishing the many new features incorporated into the broker which are cooking in weekly or better.
abubics
2017-11-13 06:59
Maybe it?s worth mentioning, too, that it?s unlikely that there?s anything sensitive in your test data.
abubics
2017-11-13 07:00
If there is, perhaps you?re relying on security through obscurity, which is a whole other class of problem :wink:
abubics
2017-11-13 07:01
Hopefully there are no algorithmic-detail trade secrets leaking out through APIs :thinking_face:
matt
2017-11-13 07:01
It's normally structure of APIs etc that people concerned about. But I suppose we don't want to be seen as deflecting responsibility either!
matt
2017-11-13 07:02
Well, if you think of APIs as products they could be quite revealing of a companies strategy
abubics
2017-11-13 07:04
true . . . new pact tests for features under development could always be a leak risk. Especially for internal APIs.
kevin.meiresonne
2017-11-13 08:08
@beth Thanks for the initial support for tags on the broker UI! Already helps me a lot in verifying results across our branches!
thadir
2017-11-13 09:21
@matt and @beth im quite sure you do. And im loving you folks so mutch, im goin to do a meetup in the Nehterlands all about pact and why we want to use the service. And there a few feature request ill have when we start paying :innocent:
thadir
2017-11-13 09:41
Lol, it has to do with autentication and richts, I want to be aible to mark pacts for "public" and "private" groups. MOre in the sence like we got our internal API's and then we got the API's we expose to uor clients.. Its a payed feature eather way for the broker :slightly_smiling_face:
matt
2017-11-13 09:43
Yep, we've been thinking about how to deal with this. Lots of ideas, we'll definitely run ideas by you
thadir
2017-11-13 09:46
Also, we been working with a lot of AIM sulutions as for our product, so if you need to figure out what kind of autentication protcol you want I can help with that my skils in Ruby are non existanced but im prity god at scala and java these days. We do not use git, we use bitbucket for our software and most is closed sorce alas. But im hoping to change that a bit :slightly_smiling_face:
thadir
2017-11-13 09:52
Nope, not for our source, were going to us federation based autentication to unlcok some of those features this would be openid connect or somting in those lines (were still looking in to it). The big idea is that were going to be the Autenticaiton Broker for the european harbor market. And you want to keep social (life) and corparate (work) seperate. Were still doing the design session on those tho.
beth
2017-11-13 09:54
So, you're still working on a federated identity server then? So you'd just want a "local" pact broker login for each user to start with.
thadir
2017-11-13 09:59
@beth sor tof, were goin gto implement an federation setup based on openid connect. This is a good protocol and thats how we want to help our clients to work with our sytems. And thus also for the pacts. But were still in the product picking phase of figuring out where to buy the solution seeing that openid connect is quite new and no one relay supports it 100% to spec atm. So there looking at road maps etc seeing who fits the bill the best.
andrew.nicholson
2017-11-13 14:16
I am looking at migrating our current provider setup to use the `pact-provider-verifier` gem -- it looks like to setup provider states we will now need to put an HTTP endpoint on our provider to handle that setup?
andrew.nicholson
2017-11-13 14:16
Previously with the `pact-provider-proxy` we were able to define that setup in a ruby file
jsilver
2017-11-13 14:47
Hey @matt. After some experimenting I found that the Jest's parallelized test running was causing the flakiness / non-determinism. I've added a comment to the issue I filed (https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-js/issues/124). Any ideas of why this might be happening?
beth
2017-11-13 22:25
We need to put some warning front and centre on the JS repo about running in parallel @matt
beth
2017-11-13 22:29
@andrew.nicholson yes, that's the language independent way of setting up provider states. Note that the URL doesn't have to be in the application itself, it could just be a little rack server running with the same connection to the db.
beth
2017-11-13 22:30
There was some functionality that the proxy didn't have that you wanted, that the verifier gem did, just trying to find what it was.
beth
2017-11-13 22:34
ok, I'm not sure if this will work, but give this a go with your original pact-provider-proxy gem. Add the `rspec_junit_formatter` gem to your bundle.
beth
2017-11-13 22:38
In your pact_helper.rb file
```
require 'rspec_junit_formatter'
::RSpec.configuration.add_formatter RspecJunitFormatter, "rspec.xml"
```
beth
2017-11-13 22:39
If that doesn't work, I'll have a look at adding it officially to the API so you can keep using it.
andrew.nicholson
2017-11-13 23:20
@beth Noted re: the provider states. I'll try that out -- thank you!
andrew.nicholson
2017-11-14 14:58
@beth that appears to work -- thanks so much for the quick, helpful response. we are looking at upgrading to the verifier gem in the future
thadir
2017-11-14 16:53
Hmm been digging trough the pact-jvm project and the documentation so i can do a presentation on the Pactbut the doucmentation for JVM is a bit a hard read. If you go blank in to it.
matt
2017-11-14 20:25
@thadir we have a few slide decks we use, perhaps we could share with you as a starting point? What?s the purpose of your talk?
thadir
2017-11-14 20:50
The name is to pact or not to pact. And the purpose is explaining how we ended up with pact and choosing for it. And the pitfalls around it if you think it's a magic bullet
matt
2017-11-14 20:52
cool, that is a pretty standard talk for us. In fact, we?ve done 2 of them in just the last 2 business days :slightly_smiling_face:
@rholshausen @beth - any thoughts?
thadir
2017-11-14 20:57
And of course the things we think why folks need to work with it :slightly_smiling_face:. Im prity happy the flow were sorta going for a story telling style (well my first ddraft got 9 days to finish it XD). Also making some cool demo code that ill put on github for folks to play with.
thadir
2017-11-14 21:02
But im going to turn in for the night :slightly_smiling_face:. cya later folks
beth
2017-11-15 04:01
I'm a bit wary of the sharpened pencils however. Seems like a recipe for disaster with toddlers.
andrew.nicholson
2017-11-15 17:48
Whoa! I was going to ask for a feature to have showing pacts by tag on the front-page of the pact-broker, but I see now that it's already implemented in the newest version! Super rad!
beth
2017-11-15 21:54
It's all going on at the moment in the broker @andrew.nicholson. Like a frog in a sock.
beth
2017-11-15 21:56
@thadir The animations on slide 11 I find are very helpful in explaining the steps of pacting: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/15Be5WOS6CTGDh_9aHEmpgrh69U0QedFxfhSTJnyXPNo/edit?usp=sharing
beth
2017-11-16 05:06
@andrew.nicholson you don't happen to live in Melbourne do you? I know an Andrew Nicholson, but I imagine there are a few around.
kevin.meiresonne
2017-11-17 08:59
Question: is there an easy way to only publish pacts to the broker if they have actually changed? Currently we publish everytime our build succeeds which leads to a lot of published pacts which are actually identical to previous versions.
beth
2017-11-17 09:25
You want to publish each time, because otherwise you won't get a result from the can-i-deploy tool for that version.
beth
2017-11-17 09:28
The broker is designed to work with CI, and it assumes that a great number of the pacts will be identical. When you publish a verification, it's actually linked to the underlying content, not the publication. This is why, if you publish an identical pact, it will be "pre verified" if the version before it was already verified.
kevin.meiresonne
2017-11-17 09:57
Oh, so if I push the same pact multiple times with a different version (git sha), it won't store the contents of that pact multiple times if it's the same?
matt
2017-11-17 10:36
The pre verification that we achieve as a result of this magic is one of the biggest benefits. It means your consumers aren't constantly having to wait for providers to reverify a contract for each trivial build.
kevin.meiresonne
2017-11-17 12:13
Is this explained somewhere? Wasn't aware of this at all, and it's a key benefit!
matt
2017-11-17 12:26
I think it's on the wiki, but we definitely need to start communicating the features better for sure
beth
2017-11-17 20:45
Good point @kevin.meiresonne. There's a high level mention of verifications on the README, and a how-to on the wiki, but I don't think I've explained the versioning and pre-verification anywhere properly.
thadir
2017-11-22 19:32
So been going trough the motion, tomrow ill be holding the presentation and also finsihg up the demo code box for PACT. For the ones interested this is the flow im going for its a rough scetch: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1ETU1XXXZ9UEQT8aWPVcN7pj7x1afYlyCvx3FcKQzSLw/edit?usp=sharing
thadir
2017-11-22 22:20
:slightly_smiling_face: yeah, stole it from your slides @beth good inspiration :wink:
rholshausen
2017-11-22 22:28
@thadir Awesome visualisation on the complexity of micro-service interactions, well done!
thadir
2017-11-22 22:30
That was the reason we wanted to go this route. Tomorow ill make more demo code (get my scala on etc )
thadir
2017-11-23 22:34
Wel did the talk was a sucsess (ended up doing it dutch bc all english speakers didnt show up on the meet up :)). But was asked to do it again. Will update the demo code, is there also a demo packt broker I could use for this so we actealy have a real life test example of the many pact test there are posible?
matt
2017-11-23 22:38
yep, I can do that. Or you can use the `http://test.pact.dius.com.au` broker which is a bit of a free for all
thadir
2017-11-23 23:46
@matt ill use that one, were going ot make the consumer in most suported language and then I want to keep it up to dat so you got a good example of how to use pact (and thus somting in the way of the spring-boot examples) repo
beth
2017-11-24 00:52
The creds are
```
Broker user: dXfltyFMgNOFZAxr8io9wJ37iUpY42M
Broker password: O5AIZWxelWbLvqMd8PkAVycBJh2Psyg1
```
thadir
2017-11-28 12:02
Hey @zac.sims and @raghunandanjahagirdar welcome to the PACT hangout for the guys who like to pact :wink:
beth
2017-11-29 09:58
If you don't get a response for a while, it's because we live in Australia, and we're probably asleep! But we've got a really great and experienced group of users who should be able to give you an answer if we're not around.
beth
2017-11-29 10:02
@thadir I'm madly practising for my YOW talk now, and it just occurred to me how tricky it would be to practice a talk in one language, then present it in another. I'm impressed!
thadir
2017-11-29 10:04
@beth english was the practiced one :slightly_smiling_face:. But english and dutch are a bit close so no worries.
kevin.meiresonne
2017-11-29 10:25
English and dutch are close? Dat is de eerste maal dat ik die hoor! :slightly_smiling_face:
thadir
2017-11-29 10:50
Kevin, natuurlijk wij zijn angolsacties en we hebben zo veel engelse woorden in onze eigen taal :wink:.
beth
2017-11-29 22:53
I'm interested to know, from the developers who work in non-english speaking countries, what proportion of code is english based vs local language?
thadir
2017-11-29 22:56
Hmm, code base is a mix between dutch and english. Seeing that the "language for perticular things in the harbor" is so Tipacly dutch that we disided that most stuff wil be english. But if it reperesents soming so particular to the market we sort of mix it up. Code is mostly english seeing thats natural. Java DOC to but some of the prosess analys documents are dutch
thadir
2017-11-29 22:59
But @beth I must say it is difrent per company. For example I worked for banks mandatory english bc the european legestatrion is english. etc.
thadir
2017-11-30 12:13
So a calouge taged me on this http://cloud.spring.io/spring-cloud-contract/ quite interesting. It feels very PACT based tho.
matt
2017-12-01 11:14
@thadir yeah we chat to them a bit. Nice people, and they've added support for Pact contacts too!
thadir
2017-12-01 11:24
We will pock it @matt we use PACT and i sort of like it mostly and the cross platform part. (And yes I don't like the fact I get Scala for my test but I can live with it). Ill defently will try it but its already PACT wise here :wink:.
kevin.meiresonne
2017-12-04 09:56
I'd like to put pact verification badges on our build dashboard. I found in the documentation how to get the badge of the latest verification of a tag of a certain consumer. However, I want to put a badge for the latest verification of a certain tag of my provider.
In other words: I want the latest verification badge of the "master" tags of my consumer and provider.
Is that possible?
beth
2017-12-04 09:59
That makes perfect sense. Not yet, but let me make an issue for it. It shouldn't be hard.
beth
2017-12-04 10:02
Just thinking about the URL. `https://your-broker/pacts/provider/PROVIDER/consumer/CONSUMER/latest/TAG/badge.svg` We don't currently have an example of anything that specifies both a consumer tag and a provider tag.
beth
2017-12-04 10:03
We're really not looking up the status of a pact now, we're looking up the status of a verification that is selected by both consumer and provider tags.
kevin.meiresonne
2017-12-04 10:04
I thought as much, a URL with tags for both provider and consumer would make sense though
beth
2017-12-04 10:06
Yes, the matrix does become large quickly! I didn't put paging on the UI resource initially, and I tried to load one of the pages, and it took AGES AND AGES and I was like, oh, there's something wrong with the kube stack... but no. Just the effect of a many to many relationship!
beth
2017-12-04 10:07
You know how to query the matrix by tags right? It's just that they don't come back in the results.
beth
2017-12-04 10:16
I haven't written up the user docs yet, but here is the pact between the broker client (the `can-i-deploy` tool) and the broker https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact_broker-client/blob/master/doc/pacts/markdown/Pact%20Broker%20Client%20-%20Pact%20Broker.md
beth
2017-12-04 10:18
You would do `q[][pacticipant]=PROVIDER&q[][pacticipant]=CONSUMER&latestby=cvp&latest=true&tag=master`
kevin.meiresonne
2017-12-04 10:27
doesn't quite seem to work with the following url:
https://broker/matrix/provider/PROVIDER/consumer/CONSUMER/?latest=true&tag=develop
beth
2017-12-04 10:31
curl -g -H "Accept: text/plain" "https://broker/matrix?q[][pacticipant]=PROVIDER&q[][pacticipant]=CONSUMER&latestby=cvp&latest=true&tag=master"
beth
2017-12-04 10:32
I developed the API for the can-i-deploy, then did a very basic UI on top of that just to be able to visualise it properly, but I didn't put the full querying into it (yet).
beth
2017-12-04 10:32
Then, I was finding it hard to visualise the JSON returned by the API, so I added a text/plain content type that returns a table.
beth
2017-12-04 10:34
You can reverse engineer it by looking at the queries generated by the different scenarios in the can-i-deploy documentation here: https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact_broker-client#can-i-deploy
beth
2017-12-04 10:36
We want the badge to be the same as the results for `pact-broker can-i-deploy --pacticipant CONSUMER --pacticipant PROVIDER --latest TAG`
beth
2017-12-04 10:36
Anyway, gotta head to bed now. I'll get on to it ASAP. Working on verification hooks now, because I may have said in my talk that they already existed...
beth
2017-12-04 10:42
@beth uploaded a file: https://pact-foundation.slack.com/files/UB8UKEMBQ/FB82B755Y/untitled_diagram__3__png
siaynoqmage
2017-12-04 22:44
Hi - I'm looking for a working example with Pact (in .NET) using AMQP (RabbitMQ) protocol - can anyone provide me one? :slightly_smiling_face: thanks in advance!
beth
2017-12-04 22:45
Hi Zoltan. Unfortunately, the message pact is currently only implemented for the JVM.
beth
2017-12-04 22:46
I know it's not .net, but here's an example of writing your own contract: https://github.com/DiUS/diy-contract-example
beth
2017-12-04 22:46
Message contracts are super simple, because there's no interaction, just a list of messages.
beth
2017-12-04 22:47
If you have a look at the pact specification v3, you'll see the format that pact uses for serialising the messages. It's pretty similar to the http pact, except the "interactions" key is called "messages".
beth
2017-12-04 22:49
The key is to separate your message writing and handling code from your message sending and retrieving code. Then you write the contract between the writer and handler, effectively ignoring the protocol.
beth
2017-12-04 22:49
Here is a blog post that Ron wrote on it: https://dius.com.au/2017/09/22/contract-testing-serverless-and-asynchronous-applications/
siaynoqmage
2017-12-04 22:51
great, I'll have a read and let you know if something is still unclear :slightly_smiling_face:
thadir
2017-12-05 10:02
Hmm, I got a good question to day.. PACT is realy json based but some of our old webservices use XML and SOAP that is actealy also interesting to put under pact to see who provides and who conusmes. Is this posible with PACT
matt
2017-12-05 10:50
The principle is the same yes, however as you guessed we only really support JSON matching at this point. I think JVM supports XML but none of the matchers. PR welcome :grin:
thadir
2017-12-05 11:02
Lol I use JVM biger problem for me is that the i get SCALA for free with the JVM version test. Not that i mind but its just a lot of data for a test.
sharding
2017-12-08 00:09
Hello, I am new to Pact and Brokers. I am curious if it is possible to publish a broker to heroku?
matt
2017-12-08 00:13
I?ve thought about making a one-click deployment for it, just never got around to it
matt
2017-12-08 00:14
no, the Broker is written in Ruby. It has an API, so in theory you could use any language
matt
2017-12-08 00:14
we have first class support for the broker in Ruby, JVM, JS, Python, Golang and probably others too
matt
2017-12-08 00:20
@sharding can you provide some more background on what you?re trying to do? The broker is (simplified) a repository of pact files, with an API on top of it. It is written in Ruby, and so has to be running in a Ruby runtime - you could host it on Heroku.
Pact more broadly is a testing framework, that requires pact files to be generated (from the consumer) and validated (by the provider). The broker is one, and the recommended way, to share and collaborate on those files
matt
2017-12-08 00:20
Those tests will be written in whatever language your consumer/providers are written in (e.g. JVM, Go, Ruby etc.)
matt
2017-12-08 00:21
If you don?t want to host your own, you could signup for one at http://pact.dius.com.au/
sharding
2017-12-08 00:22
@matt I am trying to do this in js ```const opts = {
pactUrls: 'PACT_URL',
pactBroker: 'HEROKU_URL_HERE',
pactBrokerUsername: keys.PACT_BROKER_USERNAME,
pactBrokerPassword: keys.PACT_BROKER_PASSWORD,
tags: ['prod', 'test'],
consumerVersion: '1.0.0'
}
pact.publishPacts(opts)
.then(() => {
console.log('Pact contract publishing complete!')
})
.catch(e => {
console.log('Pact contract publishing failed: ', e)
})```
sharding
2017-12-08 00:23
but if I create a node based heroku app then use that url, it will not work.
matt
2017-12-08 00:25
ok so can I assume that you have a local consumer test similar to https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-js/blob/master/examples/e2e/test/consumer.spec.js ?
beth
2017-12-08 00:29
I think we're all getting confused about the distinction between deploying a pact broker (an application that is written in Ruby and has a JSON api) and publishing a pact to the broker using node.
matt
2017-12-08 00:42
OK cool, so it?s just the Broker you are trying to deploy to Heroku? And as Beth asked, any reason not to just get a free managed one from https://pact.dius.com.au?
matt
2017-12-08 00:46
OK, so can you confirm your broker is running in Heroku? Can you cURL it or something to see if it is responding?
matt
2017-12-08 00:47
It sounds like you?re trying to deploy your application/API to heroku, not the broker
matt
2017-12-08 00:49
You are talking about express, which is a Node libarry. So you can?t be deploying the broker, which is a Ruby app. What are you deploying to Heroku?
sharding
2017-12-08 00:51
ok. so basically I need to setup a heroku instance using ruby on heroku, then use the pact api to connect to the instance?
matt
2017-12-08 00:52
I?m wondering if perhaps you?re mixing up the publishing of the contract part from the consumer test, from the verifying the contract part on the provider API. What is the express app that you?re publishing to Heroku?
matt
2017-12-08 00:54
The code from above has nothing to do with the provider, it is about taking the pact file (a `.json` file somewhere in your code base probably) and publishing it to the Broker. In that snippet of code above, you are telling it to publish the contract to `HEROKU_URL_HERE`, which isn?t a Broker, but your provider API
matt
2017-12-08 00:56
the workflow should look more like this
1. Consumer test runs, producing a `my-consumer_my-provider.json` type file
2. Publish this file somewhere (e.g. a broker)
3. Verify that your provider API meets the contract, by downloading all contracts (from a broker) and running the pact verifier against your running api (in this case, you wanted to run it against an API deployed to heroku)
matt
2017-12-08 00:57
JS example of those three steps are in https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-js/tree/master/examples/e2e/test
1. consumer.spec.js
2. publish.js
3. provider.spec.js
and as beth says, you probably don?t want to be doing step 3 against a Heroku published app, but one running locally
matt
2017-12-08 00:58
Might I suggest you have a run through https://github.com/DiUS/pact-workshop-js to understand all of these concepts better, including publishing to a broker (last step)
matt
2017-12-08 01:00
only if you have a running pact broker on your localhost, which I?m guessing you don?t
matt
2017-12-08 01:00
that parameter needs to be pointed to a running pact broker instance, which is this Ruby app: https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact_broker
sharding
2017-12-08 01:04
beth
2017-12-08 01:05
If you let us know which hosted broker you have we can tell you what the configuration should look like.
matt
2017-12-08 01:05
You could run the broker locally. But for real apps you wouldn?t do that. Think of the pact broker as a database for your Pacts. It needs to be a long lived application running somewhere that all of your consumers and providers publish and read from. So if it?s only on your machine it won?t enable the collaboration you need.
matt
2017-12-08 01:06
https://pact.dius.com.au <- get a FREE hosted broker here (that?s what this Slack channel is about) and you don?t need to manage your own broker _at all_
beth
2017-12-08 01:13
Happy to help. Even if we were a bit confused about what we were helping with! Do let us know if you can't work past this. Having your code in a public repo or a gist would make it easier to pinpoint problems.
beth
2017-12-18 04:32
@kevin.meiresonne I've made you a Christmas present. You can get your matrix badge at `/matrix/provider/PROVIDER/latest/PROVIDER_TAG/consumer/CONSUMER/latest/CONSUMER_TAG/badge.svg`
alok.pandey
2017-12-18 12:45
If suppose we are running pacts consumer with junit ....can these be ran with maven tests like a normal test which run with maven test command...
thadir
2017-12-18 16:05
As long as you fit to the JUNIT sceme name it works fine. This is the provider. Consumer is even more convienten as its a @Rule for a unitest. You should to add some asserts.
sharding
2017-12-20 22:26
I know this is a pact broker channel, but I am curious if it is possible to do multiple interactions in pact with just one server?
sharding
2017-12-20 22:27
When I try to do multiple interactions I am gettting this error `Error: done() called multiple times`
sharding
2017-12-22 19:02
I am having an issue with pact headers in the interactions. Is it necessary to have the request header in the interaction, or does pact automatically create them per the request?
sharding
2017-12-22 23:37
@rholshausen it was a problem with my code, not pact. I got it figured out. Thanks
dennis
2017-12-27 14:10
Hi, I don?t know if this is a question pact broker related, or just pact. But we are trying to figure out if the provider is the application, or the controller or event the complete endpoint ...
beth
2017-12-28 23:40
However, in your unit tests, you may choose to verify an interaction against a particular controller (if you're using junit)
thadir
2018-01-03 10:12
First off: Happy new year folks lets make 2018 the year of PACT (instead of DOG).
Here is a interesting chalange, we now have a conumser that fully a SQL database that does the request. It somthing totaly untestable (oracle SQL doesnt rely know unitest). So were opting to make a side project just to make the pact visable. Now the challange is that the contract is reversed engineerd based on the code :sweat_smile:. Makes you hate that idea :thinking_face:
alexei
2018-01-04 19:20
Our webhook for pact-broker uses POST to HTTPS site with self-signed certificate. Is there an option to turn SSL-Check off at creation of the web-hook?
alexei
2018-01-04 19:37
I think that is an issue waiting on a commiter:) https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact_broker/issues/153
alexei
2018-01-04 19:38
How that? I will try the workaround linked with the issue, changing ruby code.
alexei
2018-01-04 19:51
About the workaroung from https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact_broker/issues/149
alexei
2018-01-04 19:53
Not using a docker version, but just using with the simple ruby web-server. So I?ve change the $ROOT/pact_broker/lib/pact_broker/domain/webhook_request.rb restarted the server, but it did not help? Strange?.
alexei
2018-01-04 20:12
Got it. The installed gem had to be update, not the sources. Or somehow rebuild the sources? Now works fine!
matt
2018-01-05 22:29
Sorry we?ve all been off for a bit - even managed to stay away from computers and Slack (which if you look at our commit logs is _super_ rare)
matt
2018-01-05 22:30
We?re brewing up some big changes in 2018 - but not sure SQL contract tests will make that list - good luck! :wink:
matt
2018-01-05 22:33
@eskimoquinn sorry we?ve all been afk! I can?t speak for the Ruby implementation, but we are looking to add some more capability to the other language implementations that allow this. If you could raise an issue on the pact-ruby (https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-ruby) github that will get our attention to solve it!
beth
2018-01-06 01:17
@thadir here's a DIY example for an SQL contract. You'd obviously need to do smarter matching on the SQL string. https://github.com/DiUS/diy-contract-example
beth
2018-01-06 01:20
@eskimoquinn are you using the native ruby verification (against a rack server) or the pact-provider-verifier, or the pact-provider-proxy?
beth
2018-01-06 01:23
This is the theory, but the actual details of how you'd wire it up differ based on which verification tool you're using https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-ruby/wiki/Verifying-pacts#modifying-the-request-with-live-data
matt
2018-01-07 21:13
It's more than that though, but we'll leave it at that until it's at least in a workable draft for people to toy with :wink:
beth
2018-01-08 03:32
@alexei I've added the ability to add certificates to be used when executing a webhook. I haven't yet created the API for it, but if you send me the cacert for your certificate, I will insert it straight into the database for you.
alexei
2018-01-08 13:27
Thank you @beth, but we already did a local installation of the broker :slightly_smiling_face: (at the moment still the basic setup with WEBrick & SQLite3 db?)
beth
2018-01-08 23:47
@alexei you'll want the latest gem so you don't have to hack the ruby code. I'll put out a release for you. You can't use the docker container?
alexei
2018-01-09 17:28
@beth the challange is that customer has windows-only restriction, so_ actually, I am creating a windows docker container for pact_broker, which I probably can share when done. But windows & docker is a pain?.
I will be happy to get help from you on the way, will dm you later!
alexei
2018-01-10 15:56
It looks like webhook is triggered each time the pact file is uploaded, even when there are no changes. Is there a way to trigger only, if pact file contents changed?
alexei
2018-01-10 18:17
Okay, it was as so often user error :slightly_smiling_face: The test code was changed recently, generating random uuid-s in one field each time, so that pacts are different for real. We?ll fix the test, different pacts after each test run make no sense?.
alexei
2018-01-10 18:44
Now I?ve even realized why you may need Matchers in Request :slightly_smiling_face:
alexei
2018-01-11 14:48
New problems :slightly_smiling_face: The first one:
After update from 2.0.17 to 2.2.1 I am getting in output (!) (and nothing more from pact)
`Could not find command "http://<host>:8080/pacts/provider/<service1>/consumer/<service2>/latest" `
test is marked green, but nothing was tested as it looks.
2.2.1 -> 2.0.17 works again. (never tried another intermediates)
alexei
2018-01-11 15:13
The second (and the reason why I?ve updated):
Pact Verifier (in 2.0.17) seem to have problems with a matcher (RegExp or Type) which was put in Request/Header
```
"interactions": [
{
?
"request": {
"method": "get",
"path": "/documents ",
"headers": {
"Accept": "application/pdf",
"Correlation-Id": "8c607b69-3d35-4355-9033-a77d7fce62c5"
},
"matchingRules": {
"$.headers.Correlation-Id": {
"match": "regex",
"regex": "^[{(]?[0-9a-fA-F]{8}[-]?([0-9a-fA-F]{4}[-]?){3}[0-9a-fA-F]{12}[)}]?$"
}
}
},
...
```
Verification fails with:
```
Verifying a pact between ....
Failure/Error: replay_interaction interaction
NoMethodError:
undefined method `strip? for #<Pact::Term:0x427c218>
```
alexei
2018-01-11 15:16
?which looked exactly like: https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-net/issues/115
Should I take another version?
alexei
2018-01-11 15:27
https://status.github.com/messages - _sorry, did not meant to take down the whole github with reading the pact issues_ :smile:
beth
2018-01-12 00:16
@alexei Always grab the latest version. If that doesn't fix it, can you recreate your issue using the e2e example here: https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-ruby-standalone-e2e-example and then raise an issue in the pact-support project please?
thadir
2018-01-15 09:58
Just filled your survay on the autantication stuff :slightly_smiling_face: realy jazzed. But maybe also look in to OKTA as a way to intergate it all (we are in the mids of starting to implement that here).
matt
2018-01-15 10:42
On the back of the authentication survey, I am pleased to announce that we will be progressing with multiple streams of work over the coming months and would like to involve you in this journey. Some features will be rolled immediately across the platform, whereas others will be incubated before launch to ensure it is fit for purpose. If you are interested in participating in this program, please DM me and we?ll get you on-boarded. :raised_hands:
alexei
2018-01-15 13:18
I am on it. Just what I?ve noticed so far, in http://Pact.NET
2.0.19 ?core standalone? was update to 1.11.0 (from 1.9.1 in 2.0.18) causing the break in our tests.
and now .NET 2.2.1 it is Core: 1.22.1
It just cries out for API changes?:)
alexei
2018-01-15 13:50
And now I probably know the reason: we should have updated the gems in pact-win32, which host the correspondent ?core? code I suppose
thadir
2018-01-15 23:31
Are you using Okta as internal or for your platform (just curius). We going to start using Okta for our platform systems our clietn use and in the end wanna also migrate our internal systems.
beth
2018-01-16 03:32
I'm not up to date with what is in the core and .net releases at the moment I'm afraid. Is everything working now?
alexei
2018-01-16 08:39
Yes. We separated pact-win32 (ruby-standalone-core) and http://Pact.NET packages because otherwise we?d hit 260-chars-in-the-path problem on windows. And therefore haven?t got pact-win32 updated automatically.
dennis
2018-01-17 08:27
I?ve got a question regarding the UI of the Pact Broker, is there a reason why the delete option is not implemented in the UI but only via a DELETE with curl for example ?
beth
2018-01-17 08:39
Yes - time @dennis. Most of the Pact Broker is open source, and hence, done in people's free time. The API gets prioritised over the UI I'm afraid, like many open source projects. We'll be focusing on building a much better UI in the Saas version throughout this year.
beth
2018-01-17 08:43
If you'd prefer not to mess with curl, then open the pact in the browser (the HTML version) then click on the "View in API browser" link.
beth
2018-01-17 08:46
This will open the resource in the HAL browser (an embedded HATEOS browser). Click on the NON GET button for the `self` relation, and then enter DELETE in the Method box, and click "Make Request". You can do this for any resource.
dennis
2018-01-17 09:24
Yes I totally understand, but if this is a feature that is allowed I?m willing to create a ticket and make a pull request for this.
beth
2018-01-19 02:32
Thanks to everyone who has completed the survey on authentication and authorisation that we sent out. This info is going to be really useful for helping us choose what to build first this year. If you didn't receive the email, let me know and I'll send you link so you can have your say.
zac.sims
2018-01-19 02:46
Is there anything public (PR or doco) about these plans? I'd like to share it outside this channel as we're big pact broker users (SEEK)
beth
2018-01-19 02:49
We're using the results of the survey to prioritise our features, so we don't have anything concrete yet. At a high level, authentication/authorisation and an improved UI experience are things we're going to be addressing.
beth
2018-01-19 02:51
We're mulling on what we can do to make it easier to contract test providers with large numbers of consumers, and how to improve the change workflow amongst other things, but auth/auth/ui first.
matt
2018-01-19 04:01
We?ll publish more details over time, we are in the midst of planning the next phase in the life of this product. Stay tuned, there is a lot going on.
beth
2018-01-25 03:05
@mellis and I are working on an improved dashboard UI and we'd love to do some user research
beth
2018-01-25 03:10
Tags can be used to "bookmark" special versions (eg. "prod") or for introducing new interactions without breaking the provider builds (eg. "feat/new-thing")
beth
2018-01-25 03:11
The "feat/new-thing" style feature tags might be used for a few weeks, and once the new interactions are added to the provider, they become just part of the "normal" latest pact. Tags like "prod" and "master" will be ongoing however.
beth
2018-01-25 03:13
We're trying to work out if the "status" for each consumer/provider pair should be determined by the status of *all* the tagged pacts (as well as the overall latest) or just by the latest. Showing that something is failing all the time because some experimental pact failed 3 months ago and hasn't been removed or properly verified since is unhelpful.
beth
2018-01-25 03:14
But similarly, showing just the status of the latest pact may be unhelpful if you're really keen on knowing if your prod pacts are green.
alok.pandey
2018-01-25 14:30
Hi @beth i have pact files which were generated from consumer side written in java in broker i need to verify them using pactjs in mocha.
matt
2018-01-27 23:55
There is a full e2e example for both consumer and provider testing available, here is the provider spec: https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-js/blob/master/examples/e2e/test/provider.spec.js
matt
2018-01-27 23:56
It will fetch pacts from the broker, and validate against the locally running provider
beth
2018-01-29 01:47
Sorry guys, I got interrupted during my train of thought last week. One of the things we're interested in knowing is, what are you trying to find out when you come to the index page of the broker?
abubics
2018-01-29 03:33
Things I usually do are:
1. find the pact for a pair of pacticipants, to implement the provider side
2. see if a pair has been verified
3. find stuff I?ve misconfigured, via the HAL browser
4. see matrix to see which pairs have been verified (not until the PR comes through :wink:)
But that doesn?t necessarily answer the question of ?what would be useful on a dashboard/landing page??
zac.sims
2018-01-31 08:23
Pact (or pact broker...) question, is there any standalone pact json to markdown library? Otherwise it only seems to be in pact-ruby.
matt
2018-01-31 08:33
FYI I might be popping out to seek tomorrow afternoon if you're free for a chat?
beth
2018-01-31 08:52
If it's one that wraps the ruby standalone, you can find the pact cli and call it directly
zac.sims
2018-01-31 09:43
Basically we generate the markdown post verification (as it's nice for consumers :)). Moving from PactNet to PactNet 2 has made this somewhat more difficult
beth
2018-01-31 10:18
The standalone executable files will be in the pact net package somewhere. Either way, I'll expose the cli in the standalone for you.
kevin.meiresonne
2018-02-02 11:18
Need help on tagging. Can somebody please remind me how to tag the provider version? :slightly_smiling_face:
kevin.meiresonne
2018-02-02 14:50
Am I right the correct way to do this is by making a PUT request like this:
https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact_broker-client/blob/master/doc/markdown/Pact%20Broker%20Client%20-%20Pact%20Broker.md#a_request_to_tag_the_production_version_of_Condor_given_'Condor'_exists_in_the_pact-broker
beth
2018-02-05 01:07
@kevin.meiresonne use the CLI https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact_broker-client#create-version-tag
beth
2018-02-05 01:07
```
Usage:
pact-broker create-version-tag -a, --pacticipant=PACTICIPANT -b, --broker-base-url=BROKER_BASE_URL -e, --version=VERSION --tag=TAG
```
kevin.meiresonne
2018-02-05 09:20
I have a question about the badge behaviour when specifying both consumer and provider tags (e.g. https://<broker>/matrix/provider/<provider>/latest/master/consumer/<consumer>/latest/master/badge.svg).
I have the impression that when I've pushed a new version of the consumer pact, the badge switches back to "unknown". I would have expected it to indicate either "changed" (in case the pact actually changes) or "verified" (in case the new version's pact is unchanged).
beth
2018-02-05 10:55
Can you send me the link for one that it's happening to, and I'll see if I can recreate it tomorrow.
kevin.meiresonne
2018-02-05 12:30
(Un)fortunately, our CI is constantly building and updating, so can't really provide a badge that will stay in that state for long :slightly_smiling_face:
beth
2018-02-06 04:48
I've fixed the problem @kevin.meiresonne but I have to fix an unrelated long running query before I can push the change.
kevin.meiresonne
2018-02-06 08:21
it's not super critical, but we're building a dashboard on our CI to have a visual overview of the contract verifications between all our services to know at any given time if we can deploy.
kevin.meiresonne
2018-02-06 08:25
if I understand correctly, I can pass all my pacticipants into a single call to can-i-deploy, right?
beth
2018-02-06 08:28
it relies on you having tagged all the applications when you deploy them to an environment, so the broker knows what versions are in that particular environment.
kevin.meiresonne
2018-02-06 08:29
so that would be for instance
pact-broker can-i-deploy --pacticipant <myservice> --version latest --to prod
kevin.meiresonne
2018-02-06 08:30
and does it matter where <myservice> sits in the "chain" of services?
beth
2018-02-06 08:30
I'd generally suggest putting in the explicit version of the pacticipant, as we've had times where what the broker thought was the latest wasn't what the CI thought was the latest.
beth
2018-02-06 08:31
it works for consumers and providers, you don't need to specify which one it is.
beth
2018-02-06 08:31
it just looks at all the services that the application talks to, finds the prod version of each of them, and makes sure that there is a verification between those versions, and the one you're about to deploy
kevin.meiresonne
2018-02-06 08:32
just thinking how I can make sure that can-i-deploy doesn't miss a service dependency
beth
2018-02-06 08:34
but you're more likely to forget to update the list when a new service is created, and then it wont' be considered.
kevin.meiresonne
2018-02-06 08:36
what happens when the tool finds no verification for a certain contract? Does it treat it as a failure or success?
beth
2018-02-06 08:36
if you know that there is a project that doesn't do verifications, you'll need to list the pacticipant names explicitly
kevin.meiresonne
2018-02-06 08:37
in fairness, an ignore would help us potentially, as we are rolling out pacts gradually as we go along
beth
2018-02-06 10:32
I've had a partial breakthrough on the Explosion. It's enough that I should be able to deploy tomorrow. It take a bit longer than usual to deploy, but given that you're in a different timezone, it shouldn't affect you.
beth
2018-02-06 22:18
You'll find there is now an icon to view the matrix from the index page, and a way to toggle the "latest tags" view on the index.
beth
2018-02-06 22:19
It does turn *all* the tags on, which can make it slow. I'm still working on optimising that. However, if you care about certain tags, you can just say `?tags[]=master&tags[]=prod` instead of `tags=true`.
kevin.meiresonne
2018-02-07 08:12
@ Badges seem fixed at first sight!
Also found the icon to switch to the matrix, nice addition! Love the tags on the matrix. I suppose a blue tag indicates the latest version of that tag?
Not quite sure how to interpret the index page with tag filtering. When I filter on tag "develop" for instance, I also get lines with contracts that are not having that tag...
beth
2018-02-07 08:14
Mitch will be making the index page much prettier, so I won't put too much work into it now.
kevin.meiresonne
2018-02-07 08:14
found one small issue on the index page: one of the contracts is shown twice (no tag filtering)
beth
2018-02-07 08:15
Yes, I think it's because I did a last minute change from "union" to "union all", to speed up a query.
kevin.meiresonne
2018-02-07 08:16
what's the timeframe we're looking at here, for the first rollout of those?
beth
2018-02-07 09:14
Mitch is on leave now, but we'd like to get the first cut out within a few weeks.
beth
2018-02-08 01:45
@kevin.meiresonne I've fixed that duplicate row in the index. I've slightly improved the way the tags are represented too.
mouser
2018-02-08 03:03
i seem to be having issues with our hosted pact broker? is anyone aware of any problem?
beth
2018-02-08 03:06
This is an unusually long migration as it's materializing the query that works out the latest versions of everything.
beth
2018-02-08 07:20
I've rolled out some improvements to a some of the brokers, but I've just done a few so far, and we'll make sure everything is :green_heart: before we go the rest. There is a link to the matrix from the dashboard now, and the tags and latest tags are shown on the matrix page.
beth
2018-02-08 07:21
Mitch has been working on a fancy new UI, and we'll get some feedback from a few of you soon. Ping @mellis if you'd like to be a part of that process.
kevin.meiresonne
2018-02-08 07:59
Not sure what frogs in socks mean, but I'll take it! Love the improvements you're doing on the broker!
beth
2018-02-08 08:00
Technically, it should be "going off like a frog in a sock". It's probably an Aussie-ism.
matt
2018-02-08 08:00
It?s an Aussie Colloquialism: https://www.australiaday.com.au/get-involved/aussie-slang-dictionary/letter/l
kevin.meiresonne
2018-02-08 08:03
Btw, nice touch on shortening the version when it's representing a git sha!
kevin.meiresonne
2018-02-08 08:08
True... If I could be nitpicking, git sha's are usually shortened to the first 8 characters, not 7 :wink:
zac.sims
2018-02-08 08:36
Well, shortest non-clash > 4 to be fair, and the default is still 7 on most git installs ;)
kevin.meiresonne
2018-02-08 08:45
hmm, interesting :slightly_smiling_face: Nevermind my comment then :slightly_smiling_face:
kevin.meiresonne
2018-02-08 08:47
I have a question on webhooks.
Which variables can I use in my webhook. The only one I find is "${pactbroker.pactUrl}". Is there a way to know get the tags as well?
kevin.meiresonne
2018-02-08 09:25
For instance, when my "production" consumer pact changes, I want to trigger a build for the "production" branch of my provider. I don't want to trigger the "production" branch build for pact changes on other branches (tag) of the consumer.
kevin.meiresonne
2018-02-08 09:56
I think I found an alternative approach on solving my issue by using the pactUrl. Gonna give that a go.
thadir
2018-02-08 10:18
Hmm we been using pact for a while, and I want to auto get the version in trough maven. The consumer has now a 0-snapshot (maven default) but I want to also see what version of provider they expect (I generate some of my pacts trough client construction). How can I make sure that the version paramater is passed correctly to my broker?
beth
2018-02-08 10:49
@kevin.meiresonne I wanted to add the tags in, but because there can be multiple of them, I didn't know how to represent them using variable substitution. Then I came across some info at a conference about "state watch", where a client subscribes to being notified when state changes, and then is given the tools to find out for itself whether or not something should happen. Here's an example of how I imagine a verification callback webhook would go https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact_broker-client/blob/master/example/scripts/deploy-consumer.sh
kevin.meiresonne
2018-02-08 10:49
@beth Did something get reverted on the broker? I have duplicate lines again.
beth
2018-02-08 10:51
@kevin.meiresonne let me deploy yours again, I did a few deployments this morning, and yours doesn't have the latest
beth
2018-02-08 10:53
@thadir I'm afraid I don't understand your question, but that may be because I'm not a Java person. @rholshausen might understand better.
kevin.meiresonne
2018-02-08 10:56
@bethgiven I have the pact url of the published pact, is there a way I can know which tags are on it?
beth
2018-02-08 10:57
existing_tags=$(${PACT_BROKER_CLIENT} describe-version --pacticipant ${application} --version ${version} --output json | jq "[._embedded.tags[].name]" | jq 'join("\n")' --raw-output)
beth
2018-02-08 10:58
```
can_i_deploy_output=$(${PACT_BROKER_CLIENT} can-i-deploy --pacticipant ${application} --version ${version})
can_i_deploy_exit_code=$?
set -e
echo "${can_i_deploy_output}"
if [[ "${can_i_deploy_exit_code}" == "0" ]]; then
existing_tags=$(${PACT_BROKER_CLIENT} describe-version --pacticipant ${application} --version ${version} --output json | jq "[._embedded.tags[].name]" | jq 'join("\n")' --raw-output)
if [ $(echo "${existing_tags}" | grep "${stage}") ]; then
echo "Version ${version} of ${application} has already been deployed to ${stage}"
else
echo "Deploying version ${version} of ${application} to ${stage}"
# do deployment here
${PACT_BROKER_CLIENT} create-version-tag --pacticipant ${application} --version ${version} --tag ${stage}
fi
else
echo "Cannot currently deploy version ${version} of ${application} to ${stage}"
fi
```
beth
2018-02-08 10:58
The one thing that is missing from this is getting the version of the consumer that has been verified.
beth
2018-02-08 11:01
Eg. if v1 (tagged prod), v2, and v3 (tagged master) are all the same pact content, and the provider verifies /latest/prod and /latest/master, then there will be two verifications for the same underlying content.
beth
2018-02-08 11:02
Also, the way the verification URLs currently work (which I may need to change) there's no way of knowing whether the provider accessed certain content because it was /latest or /latest/{TAG}
beth
2018-02-08 11:05
In the above scenario when a provider verifies *any* of v1, v2, or v3, because the content is the same, the implication is that *any* of these versions could be safely deployed.
beth
2018-02-08 11:06
Only the consumer team could tell which one they actually want to deploy though. I'm guessing it would generally be the latest version.
beth
2018-02-08 11:09
If a consumer publishes v1, and then the provider verifies v1, but while the verification is running, the consumer publishes v2, which is exactly the same. If the webhook was to have a ${consumerVersion} variable, would it be v1 (which was the latest when the verification started) or v2 (which was the latest when the verification finished and is equivalent to v1 anyway)??
beth
2018-02-08 11:09
These are my challenges! The coding is easy - working out how things should operate is *hard*!
beth
2018-02-08 11:10
Anyway, I need to go to bed. Let me know if you (or anyone!) has any thoughts on this.
beth
2018-02-08 11:10
@kevin.meiresonne I've just kicked off a new deployment to your broker, it should fix the duplicate issue.
beth
2018-02-08 11:21
Bother, it hasn't fixed Andras's one, so I'm guessing yours is still the same. Will look again in the morning.
beth
2018-02-09 10:27
Hm. So, I've created a materialised view to make the index page respond more quickly. It updates asynchronously just after a pact is published. Something must be incorrect there.
beth
2018-02-09 10:28
The strange thing is, to fix the data, I ran the same sql that runs after the pact is published.
beth
2018-02-09 10:28
I must have a misunderstanding about something. Will investigate when I have a chance.
kevin.meiresonne
2018-02-09 10:32
if it helps: when publishing the pact files, I tag the version after that
kevin.meiresonne
2018-02-09 10:35
my script is pretty generic. This particular service publishes 3 pacts with 3 other services. So to be fair, my consumer pacticipant is tagging itself 3x with the same tag because it's the same pacticipant in each of the three pacts. Could that cause it?
beth
2018-02-09 10:38
It helps to know that though, because if I can write a script to recreate the issue, I'll at least know when I've fixed it.
beth
2018-02-12 22:44
If anyone wants to follow along at home (@kevin.meiresonne) I've picked up work on ruby message pact, which will be bundled as part of the ruby-standalone executable to be used for all the other wrapper languages. I've created at gitter channel for it here: https://gitter.im/pact-foundation/pact-message-ruby
abhijeet.daspatnaik
2018-02-13 00:35
I am a Test Lead and we are making a POC for our microservices testing. I need some general information about PACT. Is this the right channel to discuss about PACT concepts or its only the Pact Broker related stuff that needs to be discussed here?
beth
2018-02-13 02:48
Hi @abhijeet.daspatnaik we don't officially support pact here, but of course, pact usage and best practice comes up often. In terms of sharing knowledge, the best place to ask is stack overflow or gitter, so that others can benefit from the conversation.
beth
2018-02-13 02:49
The same people (myself, @matt, @rholshausen and some of our Super Users) will be on all of the forums.
abhijeet.daspatnaik
2018-02-13 02:52
No problem at all. One question related to Broker. I highly appreciate the fact the Pact Broker is free now. But is there a chance that after few months/years this would be priced?
beth
2018-02-13 02:55
We will be using the freemium model of making the open source version available for free, and providing extra features on top of the open source model as a paid subscription.
matt
2018-02-13 04:08
As Beth mentioned, at least for the foreseeable future, the bog standard pact broker (that you get from GitHub) will be available as a service for free. Other features may be added and made available as a monthly subscription.
abhijeet.daspatnaik
2018-02-13 23:36
Thank you @matt and @beth. Really appreciate ur efforts and the work that you guys are doing. Keep up the great work:+1::+1:
thadir
2018-02-14 10:17
Talking about freemium :wink: how are things going along with your road map @matt and @beth for the broker?
matt
2018-02-14 10:36
I won't say too much, but we have done a lot of work behind the scenes on approach, roadmap and business model and have been working closely with our directors on bootstrapping a team and creating a structure to be able to make this happen. Can't talk to specific dates but it's happening. :100:%
andrew.nicholson
2018-02-15 18:45
I have a question about pact versioning with the broker....it seems like the version of the pact corresponds to a version of the consumer software. Is the intended idea that the consumer creates/publishes new pacts as it develops the client code for a particular endpoint?
andrew.nicholson
2018-02-15 18:47
In our current development workflow, we are often spec'ing out multiple different features simultaneously, so we want to create/publish pacts for several different endpoints at the same time to allow the providers to begin work...but we don't know exactly which features will be delivered in what order, so it becomes difficult to figure out how to version the pacts properly...
kevin.meiresonne
2018-02-15 19:19
The versioning is indeed driven by the consumer (consumer driven contract).
If you're working on different features/endpoints at once, you can tag them as well. Your tags could indicate the feature for instance. Then you can have your provider verify against the latest consumer pact for a given tag for example
andrew.nicholson
2018-02-15 19:28
That's sort of what we do right now -- if we are developing feature A B and C, then they are on some future version 1.0.1 with a 'dev' tag -- then when one of them is completed we release 1.0.1 with whichever feature is complete, and then tag 1.0.1 as 'prod'. It's a little wonky though because we have to regenerate the 1.0.1 pact and remember to exclude the features that have not been finished.
andrew.nicholson
2018-02-15 19:29
sometimes we have accidentally put an unreleased feature in the prod-tagged pact b/c we forgot to exclude it -- then we get unnecessary provider verification failures
kevin.meiresonne
2018-02-15 19:30
We do it differently. Every feature has its own tag, so in your use case we would have 1 prod contract and 3 feature contracts. Whenever a feature is ready, it gets merged into the prod contract.
kevin.meiresonne
2018-02-15 19:32
We don't use semantic versioning on the contracts. Every published pact has a new version (git sha)
andrew.nicholson
2018-02-15 19:33
Ah -- is that compatible with the pact-broker 'latest' capabilities? Verifying the 'latest' version of a particular tag, or showing the latest version by default in the index?
kevin.meiresonne
2018-02-15 19:34
It is, but you need to change the configuration of the broker to not base latest on version, but on date published
kevin.meiresonne
2018-02-15 19:35
I guess it depends on the use case. But for us this was a better fit. We don't really care about semantic versioning
matt
2018-02-15 20:35
@andrew.nicholson We typically recommend the flow @kevin.meiresonne is talking about, mostly because it is consistent with Git branches which makes it somewhat easier to reason about. It also is well supported by the tooling.
matt
2018-02-15 20:35
Glad to see you got it sorted, and thanks @kevin.meiresonne :slightly_smiling_face:
kevin.meiresonne
2018-02-15 20:36
just spreading the knowledge I've learned from you and @beth :slightly_smiling_face:
andrew.nicholson
2018-02-15 21:05
@matt yes, we've been finding our current workflow somewhat difficult to reason about, and are glad for the alternate suggestion. Thanks!
matt
2018-02-15 21:08
No worries, don?t be afraid to make suggestions or raise feature requests. We?re always interested in understanding how we can fit or shape our customers? processes to make CD better.
matthewcanty
2018-02-20 15:49
Hi everyone.
I?m unsure what approach to take with micro-services architecture. However you want to define micro-service, there is a single `http://api.example.com` proxying calls to `service-x` or `service-y`.
Are client-side developers writing their Pact tests expected to know which service will be serving them, or is there a pattern which allows for multiple providers to satisfy the expectations of consumers?
Appreciate I may be a little off the ball here. If anyone has particular experience using Pact in an API Gateway/Serverless/Containerised ecosystem then it?d be great to hear from you.
Thanks!
thadir
2018-02-20 17:00
Hey @matt.canty welcome to the wonderful world of contract testing. If I get your question you have a Provider (service-x) and consumers and you have more then one Provider hosted (trough a gateway) The Pact is between the Consumer Provider. So if you have 10 unique different services then you will expet a 1 to 10 relation ship. Is it 10 consumers that reperesens the one service then its a 1 to 1 relation ship. You do not care about how many it is in quantety your interested in uniqueness.
matthewcanty
2018-02-20 17:18
Yeah I think I know where I was going wrong in my thinking. I was thinking that there was a 1:1 between provider and domain. But of course, there isn?t. I think this answers my question. Thanks.
travi
2018-02-20 17:30
to build on that question with one ive been deferring figuring out for a while... we have a hypermedia api where we make requests by following a traversal of links to make a request, rather than making each request individually. the link traversal crosses provider boundaries, potentially hitting several providers in a single "request" from the perspective of our app. since we cant really break out the individual requests, we would need to test the whole traversal together. has anyone had success with a consumer test that makes multiple requests and touches more than one provider? (our consumer is a node app)
matthewcanty
2018-02-20 18:29
Sounds like you have expectations on multiple providers, each are responsible for their part in the chain.
thadir
2018-02-20 21:31
Well this is exactly why you want a consuemr test.
The provider contract is somting like this for example:
travi
2018-02-20 22:00
yeah, the part i think i was concerned with in the past was hitting multiple providers from the same test. looking at things again now (without time to verify with implementation), i guess i really just need to define each of the separate providers for the test, set up the expectations for each, and then verify each provider's expectations individually. actually seems a lot more doable than i realized the last time i looked into it. now just need to find time to confirm
travi
2018-02-20 22:05
one consumer-driven test would need to involve a single consumer and multiple providers to generate the pact for a single traversal. each provider would verify only the part of the pact that they are involved in
abubics
2018-02-21 00:39
If you?re hitting multiple providers, each of those would be a separate pact (and separate tests).
Each external call should be an individual test, that?s explicitly the granularity of pact tests :)
Pact doesn?t verify behaviour of consecutive calls between any number of systems, not even 1-1.
travi
2018-02-21 15:11
that assumption is part of what has made me hesitate to investigate in the past. it seems to be the suggestion, but is not really possible in our case. our app does not make individual calls. we use traverson to follow traversals, so the individual requests are abstracted away from our code. the closest we can come to them is testing a full traversal, which is multiple calls to multiple providers, in a single consumer test
thadir
2018-02-21 15:27
That does not sound microservice like but a litle monolith with some microservice calls. :slightly_smiling_face: sounds like a challange.
beth
2018-02-21 22:04
You can verify a list of pacts at the same time and they can be from as many providers as you like.
abubics
2018-02-21 23:22
Looking at `traverson`?s readme, it doesn?t seem like a good fit for Pact, without some intervention.
Because it?s expecting HATEOAS, you can?t know what URLs and URL paths it will give you.
abubics
2018-02-21 23:23
An option (maybe not the best) is to create a test consumer that exercises the endpoints explicitly.
It?s less good than a real consumer, because it may use some endpoints that aren?t really used, and miss some that are.
abubics
2018-02-21 23:24
Another option might be to record what endpoints `traverson` invokes, and make sure each one has a Pact test.
abubics
2018-02-21 23:25
Other traversal tools that obviate Pact (such as GraphQL) provide different ways of assuring data shape.
abubics
2018-02-21 23:31
Another take on HATEOAS is that it?s intended to be dynamic, and if the consumer can?t handle the response, the provider can give a fallback response
beth
2018-02-22 00:34
So, I have been well aware that the way the pact is currently implemented breaks hateos since we wrote it, because the first services we wrote it for used HAL. I would adore making a proper HATEOS compliant pact format where instead of recording the path, you recorded the HAL relation and the arguments to that.
beth
2018-02-22 00:36
I have done a bit of a hack in my pact broker client/pact broker pacts to allow me to not have to know the actual URL I was hitting. I provided a fake URL in my mocked response on the consumer side, and then, I did a find/replace on the pact before verifying it to replace the placeholder URL with the correct URL before provider verification
beth
2018-02-22 00:38
And I've just realised that I haven't actually answered the question that was raised. @travi you'll need to start up two mock servers at the same time, and your mocked data from the first will need to point to a URL on the second.
beth
2018-02-22 00:43
Here's my pact broker client spec where I've used placeholder URLs https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact_broker-client/blob/master/spec/service_providers/pact_broker_client_versions_spec.rb#L12
beth
2018-02-22 00:44
Here's the code (it's a piece of Rack middlware) that does the find and replace on the request to give it the actual URL https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact_broker/blob/master/spec/service_consumers/hal_relation_proxy_app.rb
beth
2018-02-22 00:44
As I said, I'd LOVE to give this first class support, but there are too many other urgent things to do first.
travi
2018-02-22 06:27
understood on priorities and i understand that clients that actually use hateoas fully by traversing links are fairly uncommon. obviously i would love for this to have first class support at some point and would even like to help get pact there because im a big fan of the idea of pact. other priorities keep trumping me diving deeper since i keep tripping on how to get past this fairly fundamental part of getting started in our context
travi
2018-02-22 06:29
we do still follow decent url patterns in our api for developer experience for at least understanding what the link traversal is doing
travi
2018-02-22 06:30
the main sticking point taht ive had that i kind of realized yesterday after asking the question was that it should be possible to define multiple providers in the same test and just verify each independantly
travi
2018-02-22 06:31
if thats the case, ill need to find some time to give it a shot now that ive got some better context for how to approach it
travi
2018-02-22 06:32
if i have some success, maybe i an get motivated to find a way to help it move along at a more first class level (when the timing is right on your side)
travi
2018-02-22 06:33
for sure. i have a bunch of other things on my plate, but im also excited to see this work, so hoepfully i can find time soon and report back
abubics
2018-02-22 06:33
This is only for chains of nullipotent traversal calls, right? Otherwise it starts hitting behaviour issues
travi
2018-02-22 06:34
if that question is to me, i need a bit more info. not sure i understand well enough to answer
abubics
2018-02-22 06:36
so, in ReST, GET is nullipotent (no side-effects), while PUT and DELETE are idempotent (side-effect the first time)
abubics
2018-02-22 06:37
Pact (in its current state) isn?t intended to verify behaviour in a sequence of operations that change state.
abubics
2018-02-22 06:37
If your operation needs to perform a traversal in the lead-up to a PUT, POST, or DELETE, that doesn?t violate this constraint.
abubics
2018-02-22 06:38
But you shouldn?t be trying to verify anything after a PUT, POST, or DELETE, because that?s a behaviour symptom :)
travi
2018-02-22 06:39
right, we would perform GETs for the traversal leading up to a GET, POST, PUT, or DELETE
travi
2018-02-22 06:39
but wouldnt be wanting to verify any state change that resulted from the POST, PUT, or DELETE
abubics
2018-02-22 06:40
great ^_^ good to be on the same page :D sorry if my approach was hard to understand
travi
2018-02-22 06:40
we would probably want to verify the response of the POST, PUT, DELETE, which returns the updated state
abubics
2018-02-22 06:42
as long as there are no further operations after a side-effect / state change, then there shouldn?t be any constraint violation :smile:
travi
2018-02-22 06:44
good deal. its late enough here, that im not thinking through it fully, but that makes sense
travi
2018-02-23 18:06
I ended up taking a look and realized that there is still a problem that I'll need to figure out a solution for. We serve our individual microservices from the same host domain, routed by a context root. Our links are relative to the root domain rather than being full What that means for the local providers is that they need to be accessible on the same port. I don't suppose there is an easier way to accomplish this than configuring and starting some sort of local proxy and routing the tests through that rather than hitting the stubbed providers directly?
kevin.meiresonne
2018-02-26 07:54
It appears to only happen on the pact broker home page. The other pages are still accessible
matt
2018-02-26 08:10
ok cool, a bigger concern would be if your CI/CD processes stopped because of it.
kevin.meiresonne
2018-02-26 08:13
Still checking our systems, but no indications of errors on the CI level
matt
2018-02-26 08:16
I?ll have to get Beth to assist on this one. It could be a funny query missing something key piece of info
kevin.meiresonne
2018-02-26 08:20
thanks Beth. If you need more info, I'm here for the next 9 hours (but I guess you won't :D)
sinclair.calleja
2018-03-01 01:35
At Domino's we're considering using Hosted PactBroker as a store for our pact definitions of our microservices
sinclair.calleja
2018-03-01 01:36
We've got a few questions though related to IP and any legal issues arising out of storing information about our services outside of our internal environment
sinclair.calleja
2018-03-01 01:37
Typically our legal team would require a questionnaire to be filled out by our partners, which would include things like obligation to notify us in case of a data breach for instance, stuff like that
sinclair.calleja
2018-03-01 01:37
I undertand you guys are offering this service for free, and we are very thankful for this
sinclair.calleja
2018-03-01 01:38
However while free is good, am I right to assume that it comes with no liabilities and maybe even no obligations from your end as regards to IP?
rholshausen
2018-03-01 01:39
That's correct, we offer the service for free at the moment, but we can't offer any SLA's
rholshausen
2018-03-01 01:40
We are moving to a freemium model where you can get service level agreements and support for a subscription cost
rholshausen
2018-03-01 01:42
The base version will always be free, but will also come with no guarantees, apart from us generally following accepted industry standards
rholshausen
2018-03-01 01:44
We will protect your IP, take every precaution for secure the data and try to maintain high levels of up-time for the service
sinclair.calleja
2018-03-01 01:46
@rholshausen Thanks for that! I'm also going through the Terms & Privacy pages on the website, which would be a good start for our legal people
matt
2018-03-01 07:08
@sinclair.calleja Hi! Thanks for raising this, you're not the first to ask about it. Whilst the service isn't out of beta yet, we can likely cater for most of your needs with a custom contract in the interim, should your legal team require extra assurances. If you'd like to chat more about this, DM me and we can go from there
thomas.heilbronner
2018-03-01 16:02
Hello everyone,
when I?m in the ?The Matrix? view for my pact, I can access the pact information by clicking on the version (2nd column).
When I click at the provider verification version (5th column) to so the latest verification details I end up in the HAL Browser with the response header
`405 Method Not Allowed`. Is this the intended behaviour?
Is there a way to have a look at the verifications an why they for example failed with the details you see on your local pact verification run?
Or even better, is there a way to feed the verification response from to provider back into the consumer test?
I currently have a setup where consumer and provider tests run green, but the actual integration fails. (I added a json property the consumer can not de-serialize)
Feeding back the actual provider response into the consumer test would uncover this problem.
Am I missing something?
beth
2018-03-01 21:21
Hi @thomas.heilbronner we haven't implemented the publishing of test results yet, but it's high up on our priority list.
beth
2018-03-01 21:24
That is an interesting thought about feeding the actual response back to the consumer. I'm not sure how it would work, as the actual response may differ in content significantly from the example response, making the tests fail in many ways. Tee matchers that allow you to avoid brittle tests would work against you in this case.
beth
2018-03-01 21:25
Seeing the test results would obviously help, and we'll be doing that as soon as possible.
mouser
2018-03-03 00:38
Is the hosted pact broker under maintenance at the moment? Currently receiving the following error:
```Sequel::DatabaseDisconnectError at /
PG::UnableToSend: SSL connection has been closed unexpectedly```
This is not urgent btw? just thought i?d raise it seeing as i?d noticed it :slightly_smiling_face:
beth
2018-03-03 00:44
It's only started in the last few hours, but there have been no changes to the code for days.
dennis
2018-03-06 09:53
and during our CI phase we always push a new version ( with the version from maven = semver ) towards the pact broker
dennis
2018-03-06 09:53
I was wondering if this is the correct strategy, or should we build some code that we only push a pact when something actually changed ?
beth
2018-03-06 10:03
A new pact version is only created when the JSON changes. Make sure you don't have any random data in there.
beth
2018-03-06 10:03
Also, we can do a clean up. The only important versions to keep are the latest, and the latest for each tag (unless you're doing anything unusual).
beth
2018-03-06 10:04
The publishing may have slowed down recent because we're calculating the Matrix on publish, rather than on query because it was just taking too long to perform the query.
beth
2018-03-06 10:07
So, every time you publish, a new row is added to the pact publications table. However, the content is stored in a different table, and a new content row is only created if you publish a different JSON document. Most of the time, the JSON stays the same unless you're using random data.
beth
2018-03-06 10:16
there is a reason for these questions - you may just be able to delete the pacticipants and kick off your build to create a new pact.
dennis
2018-03-06 10:18
we are not using can-i-deploy , I think ( or that is our assumption ) that we got this covered with our provider pact unit tests :slightly_smiling_face:
beth
2018-03-06 10:19
Have a read of this when you have a moment https://dius.com.au/2018/01/21/closing-the-loop-with-pact-verifications/
beth
2018-03-06 10:22
So, send an HTTP delete to the pacticipant, then kick off your consumer build to re create the pact.
beth
2018-03-06 10:23
Deleting the pacticipant will clear all the versions and pacts and verifications. Seeing as you only care about the latest one, republishing it will put you back in the right state.
dennis
2018-03-06 10:24
I spoke with the devops guys, and our db is a 30Gb memory with 4 cores, so that should be sufficient :slightly_smiling_face:
beth
2018-03-06 10:25
I've improved the queries in the latest hosted version but I haven't released it in the oss version yet.
dennis
2018-03-06 10:30
@dennis uploaded a file: https://pact-foundation.slack.com/files/U9V7F915E/FB7FQLE1F/image_png
dennis
2018-03-06 10:30
@dennis uploaded a file: https://pact-foundation.slack.com/files/U9V7F915E/FB7FQLW01/image_png
dennis
2018-03-06 10:38
I assume that this is the source for our performance issues :slightly_smiling_face:
beth
2018-03-06 10:39
It would actually be really useful if you could hold off cleaning the data up until you could update, to see if that fixed it.
matt
2018-03-06 12:03
@dennis how did you arrive at an `db.r4.xlarge` instance type for your DB? That is a _lot_ of memory to allocate, we don?t come anywhere near that need for hundreds of customers. It would be worth looking at other metrics to see if you can right scale this.
matt
2018-03-06 12:04
As per @beth?s note, it would seem there is either a) an issue with the query/index or b) a constraint on the DB
matt
2018-03-06 12:06
if it?s b), one place to look is your allocated IOPS. You get 3GB of IOPS per 1GB provisioned storage. So even though you have a beefy _instance type_, you could still be throttled by IOPS. We note that on our workload, write to read ratio is generally 10:1 or higher. I would go and take a look at disk IOPS usage and compare to your provisioned IOPS - that could be something to consider
matt
2018-03-06 12:07
Look, there _could_ be some esoteric issue with Aurora as we don?t run our workloads on it (yet, as it wasn?t available in ap-southeast-2 at the time) but I doubt it.
matt
2018-03-06 12:08
You could look to isolate that problem by re-running that query? Another option is that that query is really just unlucky, and there may have been other activities happening on the cluster impacting performance during that time (e.g. something maintaining a table lock).
dennis
2018-03-06 12:12
I noticed we have about 5 connections to the database, because we have 25 bamboo CI agents
dennis
2018-03-06 12:18
@dennis uploaded a file: https://pact-foundation.slack.com/files/U9V7F915E/FB82B9LR0/image_png
matt
2018-03-06 12:28
Thanks, how many GB do you have allocated? Signs are pointing elsewhere but good to clarify and rule out
matt
2018-03-06 12:30
Good call on multiple connections though, whilst it should be able to handle hundred of concurrent connections, some actions will lock tables. As alluded to earlier, it could be the complex view that gets created for the deployments feature
beth
2018-03-07 02:48
I'll spend some time tomorrow working out exactly what query it is that is taking up the bulk of the processing.
beth
2018-03-07 02:49
It'll be either part of writing or reading the latest pact, but it's not immediately obvious to me from that line.
dennis
2018-03-07 07:11
Hi, I don?t see the allowed IOPS anywhere, if we just create a postgress RDS database it is in there. But now we just see that it is a cluster, no sign of the allowed IOPS ...
matt
2018-03-07 08:01
the 1500 write IOPS spike is the concern. Beth I think was going to look/think about that
dennis
2018-03-07 08:02
I?ll just wait for the new release tomorrow. If that does not improve I?ll remove the cluster and use a regular postgress
beth
2018-03-07 08:08
The only thing I can think of that would cause that many writes would be publishing a new semanticly sorted versions, and then publishing a version that was "before" a heap of the others.
beth
2018-03-07 08:09
That would cause all the order numbers of the existing versions to be incremented.
beth
2018-03-07 08:09
I can't imagine what could cause the latest version query to cause that much effort.
dennis
2018-03-07 08:34
app = PactBroker::App.new do | config |
config.logger = $logger
config.database_connection = create_database_connection(config.logger)
config.database_connection.timezone = :utc
end
beth
2018-03-07 22:02
I'm about to Upgrade All The Things, so if you notice slow behaviour in the next few minutes, that's why.
matthewcanty
2018-03-08 10:29
How are people handling API Gateways which sits across multiple microservices? Consumer has Pact with microservice provider, but API Gateway also contains a definition.
matt
2018-03-08 10:43
It depends on what you do with the gateway. If it's over reaching and changing payloads or orchestrating calls , then you have no choice but to contract test that layer and have a separate contact test between the gateway and backend services. If it's basically acting as a proxy, then I would treat it as a networking component and exclude from contract testing
alexei
2018-03-08 13:30
I wonder if there is a way to untag the version over API.
For example:
1.3 DEV
1.2 STAGE, DEV
1.1 PROD, STAGE, DEV
If I accidentally tagged 1.3 PROD, how can I untag it back.
Using v 2.13.1 at the moment
beth
2018-03-08 21:02
@alexei delete the tag using an http delete to the resource /pacticipants/P/versions/V/tags/T
beth
2018-03-08 21:03
Sorry @kevin.meiresonne, we were asleep. We'll have a look at the logs to see if we can identify the issue.
mouser
2018-03-09 05:39
We?re getting `504 Gateway Timeout` when trying to publish pacts? not urgent but could someone have a look at it after the long weekend :smile:
matt
2018-03-09 05:51
hmm I can see a few `499`s and an equal number of `401`s to `200`s (which is normal for clients to navigate the auth challenge)
matt
2018-03-09 05:55
Nothing else going off on our radars, but that doesn?t mean there aren?t gaps we don?t yet know about
dennis
2018-03-09 06:33
hi @beth , we did the upgrade yesterday like promised but for some reason it gave an error after some database migrations I think
dennis
2018-03-09 06:34
But with the new UI I did notice that we have a version and a tag for each pact
beth
2018-03-09 06:47
You have a special db! I'm sorry you had migration errors. I've upgraded all the hosted versions with no problems.
beth
2018-03-09 06:47
If you have a copy of the database that you can anonymise, I can have a look at it.
beth
2018-03-09 08:02
Hey , the latest version of the broker is taking some time to publish for databases with large numbers of pacts. I'm working on optimising the matrix calculation logic that is making it slow. In the meantime, I can delete old unneeded pacts if you have one of the affected databases. PM me with the name of your broker if you'd like this.
dennis
2018-03-12 08:24
the new feature with the version matrix does give us a bit more knowledge what is going on
dennis
2018-03-12 08:24
@dennis uploaded a file: https://pact-foundation.slack.com/files/U9V7F915E/FB7B7P4U8/image_png
beth
2018-03-12 08:25
It's just that the pact content that that version and tag belong to has been verified multiple times (as you would expect).
beth
2018-03-12 08:26
The fact that your provider verison is 0.0.0 so many times tells me that you're using an early version of the jvm pact verifier that published the verifications from the developers machine.
beth
2018-03-12 08:26
What you want to do is upgrade that to the latest version, and look up the docs that you can turn on conditional publishing, and only publish the verifications from your CI.
dennis
2018-03-12 08:27
we don?t have the latest version, but we are only publishing from our CI build because we have a special maven profile to do so
beth
2018-03-12 08:50
This is the gradle doc, but I think there is an equiv for junit https://github.com/DiUS/pact-jvm/tree/master/pact-jvm-provider-gradle#publishing-verification-results-to-a-pact-broker-version-354
dennis
2018-03-12 09:42
I will send you some prive messages, so I don?t spam this channel with the output from the database :slightly_smiling_face:
thadir
2018-03-12 15:40
@beth could we make the provider test push the reason it rejected a pact test to the broker so we can see trough the pact broker what and why somting is broken?
beth
2018-03-13 09:47
If you subscribe to this issue, you'll get notified when something happens https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact_broker/issues/154
alexei
2018-03-14 18:00
I am still not quite comfortable with the version notion in pact-broker. Example
alexei
2018-03-14 18:03
Let?s say I have 2 participants Consumer v.1.0 and Provider v.2.0.
Pact has automatically Consumer Version (1.0), hasn?t it? (/pact/provider/P/consumer/C/version/V -> I can only set it as Consumer version, I guess).
alexei
2018-03-14 18:04
So far, so good. Imagine, I change Consumer so that the Pact changes. I version Consumer as 1.1 and Pact becomes 1.1. Nice.
alexei
2018-03-14 18:06
Now let?s get tricky. Imagine I am changing Consumer, but Pact itself stays the same. Should I update Consumer to 1.2? But the pact will not even get uploaded (because it is the same).
alexei
2018-03-14 18:07
Now the Provider. Provider never changes Pacts, but has his own versioning. When do I change it? At every change in Provider? Or at every Pact change? Or never?
beth
2018-03-14 20:09
@alexei have a read of this https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact_broker/wiki/Pacticipant-version-numbers
berisberis
2018-03-16 18:21
Hello! Anyone had any luck configuring the pact_broker with http://drone.io ?
rholshausen
2018-03-16 21:32
@berisberis are you asking about publishing pact files or pact verification results from a build running in http://drone.io?
berisberis
2018-03-16 23:11
I was asking about webhooks and triggers, but I think we have figured out how it works. Apparently CI systems have trigger rest api url calls that get configured as webhooks in the pact_broker to re-run builds. We are making some experiments running a pact_broker in our lan.
kevin.meiresonne
2018-03-19 14:52
Did something change on the verification badge logic? It no longer shows the consumer and provider name...
kevin.meiresonne
2018-03-19 14:57
It also takes a while for a badge to render, so I'm guessing something might be going wrong in the processing
beth
2018-03-20 04:13
The logs show there were timeouts retrieving the badge svg from http://img.shields.io
beth
2018-03-20 04:16
How slow was slow? These are the timeout setting I'm using to retrieve a badge with a dynamic name from http://shields.io. `options = {read_timeout: 3, open_timeout: 1, ssl_timeout: 1, continue_timeout: 1}` If it timesout, it returns a badge with hardcoded text.
matt
2018-03-20 07:15
We currently rely on a third party (http://shields.io) but will deploy our own hosted one in the next few months. This should make things more reliable and hopefully faster too
kevin.meiresonne
2018-03-20 09:40
Issue is back... Takes about 6 seconds, then returns the default badge
beth
2018-03-20 09:59
I'm curious as to why it's not timing out at 3 seconds. There must be a time out setting I've missed.
kevin.meiresonne
2018-03-20 09:59
well, it's not a major issue, I'll just have to add labels in front of my badges on our CI dashboard to make sure it shows enough detail
kevin.meiresonne
2018-03-20 10:00
it would be more of an issue if I got no badge at all :slightly_smiling_face:
beth
2018-03-21 02:33
due to an issue with the parsing for semantic versions, I have switched the version ordering to be _by date_. The only scenario under which this will give you different results is if you are using semantic versions and you publish a pact or a verification for a previous version of your application and that version resource did not already exist in the broker. Under date ordering, it would be considered the latest version, however, under semantic versioning, it would not. I can only think of one corner cases in which this would occur, and I think it's unlikely that any of you would be doing that (testing the matrix for a version of the provider that did not use pacts when it was deployed). Let me know if you notice any problems though, and I can switch your broker back.
kevin.meiresonne
2018-03-21 08:23
We were already using the ordering by date. But thank you for the heads up!
kevin.meiresonne
2018-03-23 09:27
Hi, I've noticed a small change on the broker verification status. It now shows a "number". What does this number indicate?
beth
2018-03-23 09:45
It is auto generated and just helps you work out which rows in the matrix actually have the same verification in them.
beth
2018-03-26 01:16
the Pact Foundation has set up a slack community for general pacty goodness. Many of you in this group are pact experts now, and we'd love to have you join, for your own support, and for the support you could give others. We're working on a public signup page, but in the meantime, ping me if you'd like an invitation sent to you.
beth
2018-03-26 02:29
@fitzoh if we can get a critical mass, I'd personally like to remove gitter. I find the cross talk due to the lack of threads very frustrating. Development on gitter has shut down now too, so it will never improve.
beth
2018-03-26 02:30
The one thing gitter has going for it imo is the social login from github. I'm surprised slack doesn't offer this as an option like it does for Google.
matt
2018-03-26 02:47
Gitter is just so flakey. I don?t always get notifications, when I do I often get blank pages and have to restart the app and then go to mobile (which is also really bad).
dennis
2018-03-26 08:45
@beth or @matt, if I remember correctly I saw a message passing by in the past that you could do a cleanup on the hosted pact broker
dennis
2018-03-26 08:46
causing to reach our limit on IOPS, thus throttling and becoming slow again :disappointed:
beth
2018-03-26 08:46
The very latest version has a massive improvement in the speed. Unfortunately, I need to make the sql compatbile with mysql before I can do the public release however.
beth
2018-03-26 08:47
are you using random data in your contracts? or something that changes regularly?
matt
2018-03-26 08:47
We have a number of high volume clients on the broker and we aren't anywhere near that after more than a year in operation
beth
2018-03-26 08:49
I've made an issue here https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact_broker/issues/203
dennis
2018-03-26 08:49
@dennis uploaded a file: https://pact-foundation.slack.com/files/U9V7F915E/FB7B7Q1FS/image_png
beth
2018-03-26 23:30
@dennis could you do a query for me and tell me how many rows there are in pact_publication, and how many rows there are in pact_version? One pact_publication row gets created every time you publish a new or changed pact resource. A new pact_version row only gets created when the actual _content_ changes, and typically, this doesn't happen that often compared to the number of builds that run.
beth
2018-03-26 23:30
If you have a high number of pact_version rows compared to your pact_publication rows, I'd suspect you're using some random data in there.
beth
2018-03-26 23:32
I suspect the high disk usage could be due to the fact the matrix is being pre calculated and stored in the database.
beth
2018-03-27 06:26
You guys do a lot of builds! But from that, I don't think there is random data, because the ratio of versions to publications is so low.
beth
2018-03-27 06:28
I think you just genuinely have a lot of builds then! Best approach is to clean up the ones you don't need. I'll write you a script.
beth
2018-03-27 06:30
Are you using can I deploy? That is, are you using tags for managing your backwards compatibility in prod, or just features?
dennis
2018-03-27 06:31
we?re not using can I deploy, just doing the verification towards the latest tag
dennis
2018-03-27 06:55
https://github.com/DiUS/pact-jvm/tree/master/pact-jvm-provider-junit : The default value for tags is latest which is not actually a tag but instead corresponds to the latest version ignoring the tags. If there are multiple consumers matching the name specified in the provider annotation then the latest pact for each of the consumers is loaded.
thadir
2018-03-29 13:27
Is there a way to use pact also to set a standard rules for this is how our providers should look like . Or should I just make a generic unitest with pact as a consumer to imply the minimum what a provider looks like
tom.vanasch
2018-03-30 07:03
Hello Beth
Do you already have an update on https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact_broker/issues/203?
matt
2018-03-30 07:28
@thadir that?s an interesting idea. My initial reaction is that it seems wrong to force that using Pact (as opposed to standardisation through code templates/libraries etc.) but I?d love to hear more about it. Good discussion point
thadir
2018-03-30 08:13
I agree i prefere the later 2 but i can imagine in some big company's and many languages to make your providers the broker as a soort minimum default validation is a interesitng tool for it. It should not tbh break the release but give a sort of hey your not fitting the template/standard we want in this organisation do are you sure kinda route
matt
2018-03-30 08:22
I think it?s an interesting idea. Perhaps there is a roadmap item for the broker: consistency/standardisation checks?
matt
2018-03-30 08:23
It feels like it might be a bit nasty to be in all of the clients, but perhaps this could be another ?insight? we can surface in the broker?
thadir
2018-03-30 08:24
Absoluutly i think this kind of features are prefect for that. And if you can create a webhook on that error to do somting :slightly_smiling_face: that its even better.
thadir
2018-03-30 08:29
@matt talking about your roadmap and backlog any lights you can shed on the roadmap of the broker?
matt
2018-03-30 08:32
I can probably say the following:
1. We are getting closer to formalising the business structure and operating model (which sounds boring, but unfortunately is critical!). This is things like where money will go, accounts, tax, timesheeting, incorporation etc. etc. There is a bit of lead time on some of these things
2. The feature roadmap will always be flexible, but we are still prioritising based on before - better authentication and integration with common identity provider, improved UX and some other integrations
3. We hope to have a full time team on it in the next couple of months
beth
2018-03-30 08:58
@tom.vanasch I've got a rake task that is passing my tests, but when I run it on some real databases, it's deleting more of the verifications than I was expecting. This may not actually bother you however, if you're not using can-i-deploy. It will just make some pacts look like they haven't been verified. If you're running so many builds in a day, the verification will just be replaced soon anyway.
thadir
2018-03-30 08:59
Nice, please let me know for the pricing model I reserved money for tooling this year with my clients manager but I do need to hear pricing soon or it will be taken by other tools were going are using :wink:
matt
2018-03-30 08:59
thanks @thadir - we want to charge you, but we also want to give you new features - funnily enough, both take time to implement :slightly_smiling_face:
beth
2018-03-30 09:18
If you want to have a look and see if it's going to be good enough for you, export a copy of your database, and then checkout the latest pact_broker code and modify the connection in the `CleanTask` in `tasks/test_db.rake` to point to your own database.
beth
2018-03-30 09:20
The line for creating the connection will be `Sequel.connect(adapter: "postgres", database: "pact_broker", username: 'pact_broker', password: 'pact_broker', :encoding => 'utf8', :logger => Logger.new('clean.log'))` (replace the relevant fields with your details)
beth
2018-03-30 09:20
The way I'm currently testing the functionality of the script is to run this
```
curl http://localhost:9292/dashboard -H "Accept: application/hal+json" > before
jq . before > before-sorted
bundle exec rake pact_broker:db:clean
curl http://localhost:9292/dashboard -H "Accept: application/hal+json" > after
jq . after > after-sorted
```
beth
2018-03-30 09:21
Theoretically, because I'm deleting everything except the latest data, the before and after should be the same, however, there are some verifications that are not there.
beth
2018-03-30 09:21
As I said, this may be ok for you if you are running your verifications often anyway and not using can-i-deploy - the data will just be replaced as soon as the next build runs.
beth
2018-03-30 09:22
gtg now, let me know if you decide to give it a go, or if you'd prefer to wait until I've nutted out the missing verifications.
dennis
2018-03-30 09:44
@tom.vanasch will be contacting you in the future, since today is my last day at the company ( Bose )
dennis
2018-03-30 09:45
Hopefully I will have the chance to work again api testing related in the future, then I will definitly reach out to Pact again !
kevin.meiresonne
2018-03-30 18:42
How much upfront will we be notified of the ending of the beta program of the hosted broker?
matt
2018-03-30 21:43
We'll be as transparent as we can, which is to say we'll give you lots notice and tell you as soon as we know.
kevin.meiresonne
2018-04-01 09:30
Well, if we decide to switch to the paid plan, I'll need to create a case to get some budget for it. But if the beta remains as is it's indeed less time critical.
matt
2018-04-01 11:56
You guys have been great to us, we wouldn?t do that to you anyway :slightly_smiling_face:
tom.vanasch
2018-04-05 09:47
Hello Beth
We had some issues trying the above solution, we're running pactbroker in a docker container and wanted to do the changes in the test_db.rake file via the latest released pact docker container but the CleanTask is not yet present there, this task is only present in the master branch. How would you suggest doing this test? Is it possible to create a custom docker container for this which takes the environment variables into account for the DB connection?
beth
2018-04-05 11:11
But like I said, as everything that's in there is a build artifact, just running the builds will repopulate everything anyway.
tom.vanasch
2018-04-06 11:53
Hello Beth
The new docker images isn't starting up with our existing database, I get the following error during startup:
App 49 stdout: D, [2018-04-06T11:44:12.676554 #49] DEBUG -- : (0.358894s) SELECT pg_attribute.attname AS pk FROM pg_class, pg_attribute, pg_index, pg_namespace WHERE pg_class.oid = pg_attribute.attrelid AND pg_class.relnamespace = pg_namespace.oid AND pg_class.oid = pg_index.indrelid AND pg_index.indkey[0] = pg_attribute.attnum AND pg_index.indisprimary = 't' AND pg_class.oid = CAST(CAST('"materialized_matrix"' AS regclass) AS oid)
[ E 2018-04-06 11:45:01.0743 29/Te age/Cor/App/Implementation.cpp:304 ]: Could not spawn process for application /home/app/pact_broker: An error occurred while starting up the preloader: it did not write a startup response in time. If your app needs more time to start you can increase the Passenger start timeout config option.
Error ID: 69f7bf24
tom.vanasch
2018-04-06 11:56
Not sure where I can change this start timeout config, I found that the config property should be passenger_start_timeout for the passenger web app
tom.vanasch
2018-04-06 12:23
We decided to create another DB to already continue with the pact testing but still wanted to keep the old DB so we can hopefully solve the issue of getting a DB over 100 GB :slightly_smiling_face:
tom.vanasch
2018-04-06 12:24
We have a "production" pact broker on version 2.18.0-1 with a fresh DB which is currently working smoothly
Next to that, we have a "staging" pact broker, also on version 2.18.0-1 with the old database but this instance isn't starting up due to the error above, once this instance gets started, I get launch the cleanup task
sdulebskiy
2018-04-10 10:11
Hello. Please help
I'm using Pact Broker for sharing pacts. My provider has multiple consumers. When i publish some changes in contract with Consumer1 - Provider i want to run contract tests only for this contract. But following configuration gives an ability to run contract test for ALL existing contracts/consumers
@PactBroker(host = "test, port = "8088")
Is there any possibility to fetch only updated contract ?
beth
2018-04-10 10:40
@sdulebskiy no there isn't. Typically, the verification tests don't take that long to run, so running all of them isn't a problem. Can you explain why you'd like to just run one?
rholshausen
2018-04-10 23:04
@sdulebskiy If you're using Pact-JVM, you can filter the contracts that are verified
matt
2018-04-12 16:04
are there any plans to publish machine readable API descriptions for the Pact server? For example https://github.com/fotinakis/swagger-blocks
matt
2018-04-13 00:08
Is https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-specification not what you mean? The pact files are machine readable
beth
2018-04-13 00:14
The answer to that is, there are pacts, but I haven't had time to do swagger docs.
beth
2018-04-13 00:44
I tried looking for something which would generate the body definition from an example JSON document, but couldn't find anything
beth
2018-04-13 01:37
Then you have to do testing to confirm they're correct. And that generally means using dredd, which I have a bit of dread for.
matt
2018-04-13 01:40
There must be something in the work the Atlassian team did that checks compatibility between Pact and OAS. Perhaps I can look at that.
matt
2018-04-14 02:43
https://bitbucket.org/atlassian/swagger-request-validator
`swagger-request-validator-pact`
matt
2018-04-14 05:26
That being said, generating clients from specs never works out well IMO. I've never seen it work, we had xfire back in the day for Java - and we realised it was shit and moved forward with flexible APIs built on RESTful principles.
matt
2018-04-15 06:17
it?s a bit different, albeit I?ll concede it?s one of the few widely used _things_ in that space :wink:
matt
2018-04-15 06:17
gRPC gateway is pretty cool though, which I suppose is maybe what you?re getting at?
matt
2018-04-15 06:19
IMO the generated clients for Swagger always need some changes eventually (e.g. want to wrap a circuit breaker around it? Want to plug your own logger in etc.). When you use generated code, this is almost always a massive pain in the arse to do, because there are so many layers of abstraction built in to the tooling
beth
2018-04-15 23:38
This library has nothing to do with the Pact Broker API. It validates a pact against a provider swagger document.
oswald.quek
2018-04-16 13:57
hello. it seems the PactBrokerClient (https://github.com/DiUS/pact-jvm/blob/master/pact-jvm-pact-broker/src/main/kotlin/au/com/dius/pact/pactbroker/PactBrokerClient.kt) fails to publish the verification back to the pact broker when it's an HTTPS POST call to the pact broker. i see the following in my test logs
```
[a.c.d.p.p.ProviderVerifier] - Failed to publish verification results - Connect to localhost:1234 [localhost/127.0.0.1, localhost/0:0:0:0:0:0:0:1] failed: Connection refused (Connection refused)
```
i currently think it's a problem with the underlying apache httpclient as it somehow tries to route the request to localhost:1234. i'll do some further investigation but thought i'd mention it here in case anyone has any quick workarounds. thanks.
oswald.quek
2018-04-16 13:58
FYI i've tested with a unit test publishing the verification to a locally running pact broker on http and it works
oswald.quek
2018-04-16 13:59
and the annotations on my unit test looks like
```
@RunWith(PactRunner.class)
@Provider("adminusers")
@PactBroker(protocol = "https", host = "pact-broker-test.cloudapps.digital", port = "443", tags = {"latest"}, authentication = @PactBrokerAuth(username = "blahblahblah", password = "blahblahblah"))
public class UsersApiTest {
```
oswald.quek
2018-04-16 14:23
it's very weird because the pact can be got from `pact-broker-test.cloudapps.digital` alright but the pact broker client can't publish the verification back to it
oswald.quek
2018-04-16 16:32
by the way the `pb:publish-verification-results` in the pact got from the broker is `https://pact-broker-test.cloudapps.digital/pacts/provider/adminusers/consumer/selfservice/pact-version/acb779f7a02394f7dad1db0da3b344f8a17d67de/verification-results` :slightly_smiling_face:
matt
2018-04-16 20:54
there is currently an issue with a number of running containers. The majority of customers aren?t impacted, however a select few of you will be experiencing intermittent timeouts. Unfortunately automated actions didn?t catch this one and will be taking manual action shortly
beth
2018-04-17 03:42
I assume it eventually started? The clean up task doesn't need a running app, just the database.
thadir
2018-04-18 12:51
were walking against the problem that we wanna delete consumers that we removed out the build process bc we stoped using them. But the delete step is a bit user unfrendly when whats the best way to this.
beth
2018-04-18 21:32
@thadir Sorry, deleting is just not currently implemented in the UI. It's on the list for the 'paid for' UI! The easiest way is to open the pacticipant resource in the HAL browser and send a DELETE request to the `self` relation.
beth
2018-04-18 21:35
Open the pact URL in a browser, click "View in API browser", then click the `NON-GET` button for the `pb:consumer` or `pb:provider`, and send a `DELETE` request straight to it.
thadir
2018-04-18 22:51
thing been in produciotn for as logn were using the broker atm :stuck_out_tongue:
beth
2018-04-18 23:06
No, you can delete the pacticipant and all the pacts will be deleted. You may have the version with the bug. I think I responded to an issue you raised.
oswald.quek
2018-04-20 15:27
In a consumer pact, how do I specify a state with values? Looking at https://github.com/DiUS/pact-jvm/tree/master/pact-jvm-provider-junit#example-of-http-test, there is a suggestion I can do this
```
@State("a user with id 1 exists") // Method will be run before testing interactions that require "with-data" state
public void toStateWithData(Map<String, String data) {
data.get("user"); //value is "1"
```
so in my consumer test, I should be able to do something like (for pact-js)
```
provider.setup()
// (3) add interactions to the Mock Server, as many as required
.then(() => {
return provider.addInteraction({
// The 'state' field specifies a "Provider State"
state: {
description: 'a user with id 1 exists',
data: [ { 'user': '1'} ]
}
```
for example. (Note the *data* fields)
Yet in the documentation (https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-js#verification-options) I see something about `providerStatesSetupUrl` which is just confusing.... I don't want to have to be setting up new URLs for provider states.
Can I actually pass state data into the pact provider test the way I want it to? It feels more intuitive.
rholshausen
2018-04-21 02:37
@oswald.quek the key-value data that is associated with the provider states is from the V3 spec, which only the JVM and Rust implementations support
rholshausen
2018-04-21 02:37
Pact-JS wraps the Pact-Ruby mock server, which only supports the V2 spec.
beth
2018-04-23 22:37
@oswald.quek the provider state set up URL doesn't have to be in the app itself, it just needs to have access to the same underlying data store to set up the right data. You do need this so you can set up the right data for each request.
asfan.siddiqui
2018-04-24 09:43
No such property: statusLine for class: java.io.StringReader...getting error while publishing pact file to broker ..need help on this .!!
beth
2018-04-24 10:11
I'm afraid that's not much to go on @asfan.siddiqui. We'll need a bit more context. Generally, when raising an issue, you'll need to provide the versions of the relevant software, the expected behaviour, the actual behaviour, the steps to reproduce, and a (preferably executable) code sample demonstrating the issue.
richard.jones
2018-04-27 02:52
@beth (because we're gumming up a github bug report with a bordering-on-irrelevant discussion :smile: ) hi, I would very much like to release the verifier I've been working on but we have some hurdles to get past here before I can.
richard.jones
2018-04-27 03:09
We desired a tighter integration with our (python) tooling than was possible with the pact-python/ruby process model. We've now got tight integration with pytest (one "test" per pact interaction), including junit output, and the ability to perform tighter provider server management in line with our existing test suite.
richard.jones
2018-04-27 03:10
We're also going to be looking at generating the contracts differently (we still use pact-python to do that, which spawns the ruby server, when we could be using something far more light-weight and direct.)
richard.jones
2018-04-27 03:11
That was just a nice side-effect of the implementation :slightly_smiling_face:
oswald.quek
2018-04-27 12:22
my tech lead was mentioning something about "pact best practices" and that's what I got when I entered that into google
oswald.quek
2018-04-27 15:15
hi again, i have a question about tagging consumer versions. I understand I want to tag a provider with "prod" for example, so before I deploy a consumer I can run `pact-broker can-i-deploy --pacticipant documentmanager --version 1.2.7 --to prod`, where the `--to` flag indicates the prod version of the provider in this case. but why would I want to tag the consumer version with "production"? My question comes from seeing this in the pact file:
```
"pb:tag-prod-version": {
"title": "PUT to this resource to tag this consumer version as 'production'",
"href": "https://some-url/pacticipants/selfservice/versions/some-version/tags/prod"
}
```
oswald.quek
2018-04-27 15:25
oh, is it because before deploying the provider to prod it needs to know what's prod version on the consumer side?
oswald.quek
2018-05-02 14:20
hello. i have a question regarding the image above :arrow_up: . I actually tagged the consumer version `bf2703e` with `test` but presumably the `test` tag didn't appear with the `bf2703e` version because the pact between both consumer versions and the provider are exactly the same. so that's ok.
let's say the consumer `bf2703e` gets deployed, because it is on master branch after all. so now when I want to deploy the provider I can do `./pact-broker can-i-deploy --pacticipant <provider> --version <version> --to test` to verify it doesn't break the contract with the consumer. all good, because the pact between both consumer versions and provider are the same.
let's say though, if before I deployed the provider, someone else updated the pact on the `a254945` consumer? because it is not master branch anyway. what happens if I do `./pact-broker can-i-deploy --pacticipant <provider> --version <version> --to test` now? is the pact-broker smart enough to know the pact i'm interested in belongs to the `bf2703e` consumer version?
beth
2018-05-03 09:16
@oswald.quek
> I actually tagged the consumer version `bf2703e` with `test` but presumably the `test` tag didn't appear with the `bf2703e` version because the pact between both consumer versions and the provider are exactly the same. so that's ok.
The index page only shows the _latest_ tags. If you go into the matrix page, you'll see the tags for all the versions - the ones that are not the latest will be grey, and the latest ones will be coloured. You're only seeing the test tag against a254945 because it is the latest version with the test tag.
> let's say though, if before I deployed the provider, someone else updated the pact on the `a254945` consumer?
Can you clarify this? Do you mean, someone published different pact content with the same consumer version, so that the resource that was at `/pacts/provider/X/consumer/Y/version/a254945` now has different content? Or, do you mean, someone published a new resource `/pacts/provider/X/consumer/Y/version/xxxxxxx` and tagged it with `test`?
beth
2018-05-03 09:24
Something that may help you understand how the can-i-deploy works is to look at the matrix page, by clicking on the little icon with the squares that is next to the pact icon. When you say "can i deploy to test" it finds the latest version of the other app with the `test` tag, and makes sure there is a row that also has the provider version you're about to deploy. The critical part is that the verification belongs to the _content_, not the version number, so if you publish a pact with the same content, it's "pre verified" in effect.
oswald.quek
2018-05-03 11:34
I meant if someone published different pact content with the same consumer version, so that the resource that was at `/pacts/provider/X/consumer/Y/version/a254945`. but actually, i think it might have been my mistake... I must have somehow tagged version a254945 with "test" which I wasn't supposed to as it's a branch.
oswald.quek
2018-05-03 11:35
@beth thanks for all of that. looking at the matrix clarified my understanding.
matt
2018-05-03 11:44
Once I got the idea that the pact is independent of the consumer/provider version, stuff started to make sense to me
matt
2018-05-03 11:44
When you think there are consumer, provider and pact versions your head wants to explode when you combine it with tags etc.
acooper106
2018-05-03 12:45
a couple things don't seem to be working correctly. I'm wondering if anyone has successfully gotten a webhook to kick off a build?
abubics
2018-05-03 13:30
I definitely have, but you are unlikely to get an answer for another 10 hours :) everyone is asleep here (or close)
acooper106
2018-05-03 17:01
I created the webhook incorrectly on the broker, but I can see them listed. When I got the correct config for my bamboo server, I created a new webhook. When I tested the webhook it said 200 ok
acooper106
2018-05-03 17:02
then I noticed that my new webhook setting were not listed only the 2 previous ones that I created
acooper106
2018-05-03 17:03
however when I tried to create the webhook again the new one with the correct details still doesn't show
matt
2018-05-03 20:56
@acooper106 just checking, did you upload a _new_ pact (with different contents), or just publish a new version of a pact? The broker is smart enough to know a pact hasn?t changed and may not trigger a webhook
beth
2018-05-03 23:30
Yes, this is exactly what I was thinking. @acooper106 you can see the webhooks listed if you to to `/webhooks`
asfan.siddiqui
2018-05-04 09:03
can we delete the pacts uploaded on pact broker.I dont find an option to delete the pacts dere.
beth
2018-05-04 09:05
Open the pact in the browser, click on the "View in API browser" link. Then, click on the "non get" request button for the "self" relation, and send it a DELETE.
beth
2018-05-04 09:06
If you do the same to the pacticipant resource, you'll delete all versions of the pact.
acooper106
2018-05-04 18:59
{"_links":{"self":{"title":"Webhooks","href":"https://pactbroker-dev.opst.c1.vanguard.com/webhooks"},"pb:create":{"title":"POST to create a webhook","href":"https://pactbroker-dev.opst.c1.vanguard.com/webhooks"},"pb:webhooks":[],"curies":[{"name":"pb","href":"https://pactbroker-dev.opst.c1.vanguard.com/doc/webhooks-{rel}","templated":true}]}}
beth
2018-05-05 03:12
If you click on it, you'll get the webhook status page. If there has been an error, you'll find an `error-logs` relation for the error logs in the Links section. Click on the "GET" button to see them.
beth
2018-05-05 03:13
If you see no evidence of any attempted executions, look in the application logs.
beth
2018-05-05 03:19
If you see no logs related to a webhook, it means that the json content was the same as the previous version, so the webhook will not be triggered. If you see "No webhook found for consumer ..." then the json had changed, but there are no webhooks found. If you see "Scheduling job for ..." then the content has changed, a webhook has been found, and a background job has been created to execute it.
beth
2018-05-05 03:28
@acooper106 can you check that the webhook is for pact publication, and not for verification publication? A verification webhook won't fire if you publish a pact.
beth
2018-05-07 09:41
One of my colleagues wrote a blog post on using the pact broker with git workflow. They've come up with a really nice workflow. https://dius.com.au/2018/05/04/pact-testing-git-workflow-and-continuous-integration/
abubics
2018-05-07 09:59
Nice :) maybe this isn't the best place for feedback? But I waa confused by this:
> Our build pipeline, in such instances will again first search for pacts tagged with the provider branch name only, but it will not find any pacts tagged with this branch name in the Pact Broker. It will then fetch the latest pacts for all the consumers against the master branch (tag == master).
The provider branch name is `master`, so the first sentence means the second sentence... Unless I misinterpret?
acooper106
2018-05-07 10:55
Creating
To create a webhook, in the HAL Browser, navigate to the pact you want to create the webhook for (Click "Go to Entry Point", then select "latest-pacts", then select the pact you want to create the webhook for.)
Click the "NON-GET" button for the "pact-webhooks" relation.
Paste in the webhook JSON (example shown below) in the body section and click "Make Request".
An example webhook to trigger a Bamboo job when a contract has changed.
{
"events": [{
"name": "contract_content_changed"
}],
"request": {
"method": "POST",
"url": "http://master.ci.my.domain:8085/rest/api/latest/queue/SOME-PROJECT?os_authType=basic",
"username": "username",
"password": "password",
"headers": {
"Accept": "application/json"
}
}
}
acooper106
2018-05-07 10:57
@acooper106 uploaded a file: https://pact-foundation.slack.com/files/UB7USQSNP/FB93REM1V/webhook_uploaded_new_pact_jpg
beth
2018-05-07 11:05
The date is when it was published. The actual content needs to be different to the previous version before the webhook gets triggered. Make sure you're publishing with a new version number each time as per the documentation about "Pacticipant version numbers" on the Pact Broker wiki.
acooper106
2018-05-07 13:54
Yes, its new content and a new version number. I was saying I can tell the pact was changed because its yellow and the status of the pact says changed.
matt
2018-05-07 14:04
What do the logs say? Perhaps there is an issue getting out of proxy/firewall? There should be a webhook logs page there (off top of my head I can?t recall its name)
acooper106
2018-05-07 20:55
I got the webhook working as expected, I think. So the broker showed green but the actual provider build failed. Is this expected.
beth
2018-05-08 03:49
@acooper106 have you got ordering by date turned on? I recommend turning it on if you don't already. https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact_broker/wiki/Configuration#ordering-versions-by-date
beth
2018-05-08 03:50
You're having so many problems it feels like there's some fundamental thing that's not right. What version number scheme are you using?
beth
2018-05-08 03:51
Did the provider build fail because of the pact verification, or for another reason? The broker only knows about the verification results, not the status of the overall build.
richard.jones
2018-05-08 23:10
Question for the specification: currently all aspects of a request can be specified with matcher types *except* the URL. That is, allowing something like with_request('GET', "/service/product/1234/details/") and a request matchingRules like {"path": {"matchers": [{"regex": "/service/product/\d+/details/"}]}}... Basically to allow the mock to respond to variations on the URL, not just the params. Is that something that's on the radar?
richard.jones
2018-05-08 23:16
and indeed there's test cases for that behaviour that I satisfy in my verifier :stuck_out_tongue:
matt
2018-05-08 23:16
sometimes you just need to ask, and then you dig deeper - glad you found it :slightly_smiling_face:
matt
2018-05-09 07:44
OK, I bring you the (new) definitive guide to versioning in the Pact Broker: https://docs.pact.io/getting_started/versioning_in_the_pact_broker.html
matt
2018-05-09 07:44
Thanks to @tjones for his hard work on this, and lessons from the trenches :slightly_smiling_face:
oswald.quek
2018-05-09 12:51
FYI the numbering and bullet points looks a bit off at https://docs.pact.io/getting-started/versioning-in-the-pact-broker#rules
kabagchi87
2018-05-09 13:53
I have used @PactBroker to pass ip,port and protocol and @PactBrokerAuth with userid and pass
acooper106
2018-05-09 18:52
The provider verification failed because the tag changed. Maybe the successful status of the webhook is correct because the webhook did execute successfully even tho it couldn't find the pact file.
acooper106
2018-05-09 18:53
The pact version is using the project version unless the team feels a need to override it. One team choose to do that, but all other teams are using the project version by default.
acooper106
2018-05-09 19:07
```Add the following constructor to the open source project:
https://bitbucket.org/atlassian/swagger-request-validator/src/267f1c2342a93a5bc236a74094bb4d73404a29b3/swagger-request-validator-pact/?at=master
public ValidatedPactProviderRule(final String swaggerJsonUrl, final String basePathOverride, final String providerId, final Object target, String host, int port) {
this.delegate = new PactProviderRule(providerId, host, port, target);
this.providerId = providerId;
this.target = target;
this.validator = SwaggerRequestResponseValidator
.createFor(swaggerJsonUrl)
.withLevelResolver(PactLevelResolverFactory.create())
.withBasePathOverride(basePathOverride)
.build();
}```
matt
2018-05-09 20:46
That's right, but the verification status should definitely not be great, if you're publishing those results
matt
2018-05-09 20:47
When you say project version, do you mean Maven project version? So the default Java jar versioning scheme?
matt
2018-05-09 20:48
Is the broker setup with the date based versioning setting or semantic versioning?
beth
2018-05-10 23:57
Sorry @acooper106 we have no experience with the swagger validator. You'll have to ask the atlassian team.
beth
2018-05-11 00:00
@acooper106 can you make sure that all the teams have read this? https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact_broker/wiki/Pacticipant-version-numbers
beth
2018-05-11 00:01
The pacticipant numbers need to reflect the _commit_ of each codebase for the matrix to work.
beth
2018-05-11 00:01
If the pacts are being published with the same version number multiple times, it won't work.
acooper106
2018-05-14 12:11
the verification status stayed yellow because the build failed and couldn't find the file nothing was updated to the broker
acooper106
2018-05-14 12:18
CashflowEngine version: 1.0.0.RETCFE-WEBSERVICEDOMAIN-71 (cashflow-engine.webservice-domain.1.0.0.RETCFE-WEBSERVICEDOMAIN-71)
acooper106
2018-05-15 19:20
the last number is a build number. it will only change if the project version changes and the pact changes
acooper106
2018-05-15 19:25
the tag is the GAV of the project. I mentioned how we are using tagging before:
Tagging ? we are not using master/prod instead we are using the project artifact_name.version_id because if a consumer merges to master and the pact tag changes to master then the provider would be verifying that pact without consent. By using the unique id the provider can update when ready.
acooper106
2018-05-15 19:30
@acooper106 uploaded a file: https://pact-foundation.slack.com/files/UB7USQSNP/FB82BEV5G/the_steps_to_reaching_pact_nirvana_pdf
acooper106
2018-05-15 19:31
I had some general questions or difference about whats in this doc and wanted to see how other were using developing pact into their CD process.
acooper106
2018-05-15 19:36
1. Tagging ? we are not using master/prod instead we are using the project artifact_name.version_id because if a consumer merges to master and the pact tag changes to master then the provider would be verifying that pact without consent. By using the unique id the provider can update when ready.
acooper106
2018-05-15 19:36
2. The Pact sequence diagram ? can you point out where the can I deploy tool is triggered in the flow. On the webhooks page it say they can be used together but I?m not understanding that flow. I wasn't sure if the webhook was meant to kicks off the deployment plan which kicks off the can I deploy. We have implemented can I deploy as a new stage in our deployment and the webhook can kick off a bamboo build (recommended master, but we are leaving it up to teams to create their own webhook).
acooper106
2018-05-15 19:36
3. Example use case ? The network diagram and pact broker made me think there were 2 different consumer teams, however there is one team creating 2 pacts. I was under the impression that if it?s the same Consumer team then they would put all the tests in one pact since its to same provider. Seems like this example use case would make more sense if you had 2 consumers. Or is the best practice for consumer to make multiple pacts to the same provider?
acooper106
2018-05-15 19:36
4. ?Note that tests could be written that identify a new pact? ? do you have doc on how to do this? What do you think about alerts/emails for new pacts and changes to a pact, or should the provider just check the broker which would indicate the change?
richard.jones
2018-05-15 22:27
Hi @acooper106 just wondering where you got that doc from? I can't find the source in google.
beth
2018-05-15 23:23
Hey @richard.jones it's a document that I've been working on that I just haven't had the time to finish yet. I sent a draft to Allegra. I'll see if I can get what I've done out on a public page tomorrow.
beth
2018-05-15 23:25
Why don't you just link directly to the version then? There's no need to use a tag. I say this because too many tags will slow down some resources.
beth
2018-05-15 23:32
One consumer would not have multiple pacts with the same provider. They will have multiple versions of the same pact though.
acooper106
2018-05-16 12:27
When we didn't use tags provider builds were failing when a new contract was added or changed. Your doc says that branches should use a unique feature tag, but we are using the GAV which is also unique. What is the difference? And for master you recommend a generic tag (master/prod), but in this case any consumer could merge to master and break a provider build. If providers find the tag maintenance to much then they can always override the default to master/prod,
acooper106
2018-05-16 14:07
Ok then I believe that we have implemented it correctly. Consumer adds a new pact which kicks off the webhook which kicks off the provider build. If the consumer build passes then they merge to master which will kick off the can I deploy.
acooper106
2018-05-16 14:13
I think what could be missing is what happens on branch verse master builds. Or is this doc only for the consumer and provider's master build. In the scenario I mentioned above, we don't have the provider kick of the consumer's deployment task "can I deploy" because the pact hasn't been merged to master yet.
acooper106
2018-05-16 14:15
So in your example should you have 2 different consumer teams using the same provider?
beth
2018-05-16 21:52
> The network diagram and pact broker made me think there were 2 different consumer teams, however there is one team creating 2 pacts.
Sorry Allegra, I don't know which example you're talking about.
beth
2018-05-16 21:55
Is it the one with PactPhpExampleClient, PactNetExampleClient and PactExampleApi?
beth
2018-05-17 07:09
Hi I've just done a google docs publish of the "Steps to reaching Pact Nirvana" document that I've been working on slowly for far too long! I'll be formatting it nicely and putting it on the DiUS website, but rather than waiting for that to happen, I thought I'd just get the content out there so you can have a look at it. Feedback would be appreciated! https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vRf1kSDccImNipOOm1G-bjcSs-ifbZjf1v54K-dIcq8BLKeFPAAm_bf_p71UKqkRMIx30QWWL-kN8TI/pub
kevin.meiresonne
2018-05-17 07:21
Something we leverage as well are the verification badges. We put them on a "release dashboard" so at any point in time we can see if our suite is in a releaseable state
beth
2018-05-17 07:25
I'd love to get some use cases from some of our advanced pact broker users like you @kevin.meiresonne
beth
2018-05-17 07:25
Everyone's release process is different, so it's hard to describe "the" way of doing it. There will be heaps of different ways of integrating pact+broker into a release pipeline.
kevin.meiresonne
2018-05-17 07:26
of the entire dashboard? or just the pact bits (which in fairness isn't much more than a list of badges which redirect to the contract in question) and links to the broker and relationship graph.
kevin.meiresonne
2018-05-17 07:27
ours is pretty close to the strategy you describe though, but when time permits, I'll happily write our process down (need it anyway for our teams :))
beth
2018-05-17 07:27
just the pact bit. but I guess I'm interested in the underlying config of the badges too. I know you guys are using the matrix badges, so you must have a consumer tag and a provider tag that must be green for you to deploy. what do you use?
kevin.meiresonne
2018-05-17 07:30
Indeed, we use the tagged badges:
<BROKER>/matrix/provider/<MYPROVIDER>/latest/master/consumer/<MYCONSUMER>/latest/master/badge.svg
beth
2018-05-17 07:34
It's more of a problem when one service is under rapid development, and another one hasn't been deployed for months.
kevin.meiresonne
2018-05-17 07:40
also, the deploy always consists of all services, so there's no chance of contracts breaking because of backward compatibility (if the badges are all green)
richard.jones
2018-05-18 04:52
Hi Pact folks, some advice please: when unit testing and generating contracts for a PATCH interface, how do best handle the myriad combination of attributes that the unit tests might generate (including null vs. non-null values)?
beth
2018-05-18 04:57
Trying to exhaustively test each field individually wouldn't be helpful or feasible I think.
beth
2018-05-18 04:58
You'd want to make sure that the resource returned the updated state in its response.
richard.jones
2018-05-18 04:59
It's an actual JSON patch, yeah. I'll work with the folks here to try to get the single request approach happening, it'll require a bit of a rethink of their unit testing (which may be beneficial anyway)
beth
2018-05-18 05:00
This is not exactly an answer to your question, but is relevant https://docs.pact.io/best-practices/consumer#beware-of-garbage-in-garbage-out-with-put-post-patch
richard.jones
2018-05-18 06:10
That is actually relevant. A team I was talking to was effectively trying to code provider behaviour (and test the provider behaviour) though the consumer pact, and twisting themselves in knots trying to figure out how to do it :smile:
paul.davidson
2018-05-21 08:18
Hey folks. I am looking at the hosted pact broker to see if it would suit my use. Is there any way to order pacts by date created, rather than by build number through the hosted solution?
kevin.meiresonne
2018-05-21 08:19
Yes, it's possible. The people hosting the broker can change the configuration to do so
paul.davidson
2018-05-21 08:20
on a per customer basis? I wasn't sure if it was just one large multi-tenant deployment or not
beth
2018-05-21 09:05
It's now the recommended configuration, and I'll set it to that in the next major release.
oswald.quek
2018-05-21 10:02
Just looking at the pact jvm consumer junit test https://github.com/DiUS/pact-jvm/tree/master/pact-jvm-consumer-junit#using-the-base-consumerpacttest. Instead of configuring the pact test like so
```
@Override
protected RequestResponsePact createFragment(PactDslWithProvider builder) {
Map<String, String> headers = new HashMap<String, String>();
headers.put("testreqheader", "testreqheadervalue");
return builder
.given("test state") // NOTE: Using provider states are optional, you can leave it out
.uponReceiving("ExampleJavaConsumerPactTest test interaction")
.path("/")
.method("GET")
.headers(headers)
.willRespondWith()
.status(200)
.headers(headers)
.body("{\"responsetest\": true, \"name\": \"harry\"}")
```
is it possible to define the pact as a json file directly? e.g.
```
@Test
@PactFile("consumer-provider.json")
public void someTest() {}
```
where `consumer-provider.json` looks exactly like the pact generated, e.g.
```
{
"consumer": {
"name": "a-consumer"
},
"provider": {
"name": "a-provider"
},
"interactions": [
{
"description": "a valid get user request",
"providerState": "a user exists",
"request": {
"method": "GET",
"path": "/v1/api/users/ABC",
"headers": {
"Accept": "application/json"
}
},
"response": {
"status": 200,
"headers": {
"Content-Type": "application/json"
},
"body": {
"external_id": "7d19aff33f8948deb97ed16b2912dcd3",
"username": "",
"email": ""
}
}
]
}
```
oswald.quek
2018-05-21 10:03
a benefit I see is that multiple unit tests can just use the same pact file
oswald.quek
2018-05-21 10:06
also looking at the pact java8 dsl it become more complicated to write nested objects. Taking https://github.com/DiUS/pact-jvm/tree/master/pact-jvm-consumer-java8#lambda-dsl-1 as an example the `a.object((o) -> o.stringValue("foo", "Foo"))` become much more complicated when there are more nested values/objects in the json structure and it looks like i have to manually set every value using the dsl when it would just be easier if I could define the response of the provider in the pact json file.
matt
2018-05-21 12:01
@oswald.quek what about an option where the DTO objects are tagged with annotations, similar to what you see with your JPA / SQL annotations?
matt
2018-05-21 12:02
...as a potential enhancement, that is. Then you could potentially specify the object to match, and the framework will automatically generate the matchers based on the annotations
oswald.quek
2018-05-21 12:07
well currently i'm trying to define my pact like https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-specification/tree/version-3#example, then using a custom annotation to read in that file and use the PactReader (https://github.com/DiUS/pact-jvm/blob/master/pact-jvm-model/src/main/groovy/au/com/dius/pact/model/PactReader.groovy) to get the Interaction
nic
2018-05-21 12:59
hey all, I'm trying to get js based pact consumer tests running inside a docker container but when pact-node starts up the mock provider it fails to connect to localhost:8989
nic
2018-05-21 13:00
is this a known thing? - I can see there is some work going on with docker examples but nothing complete yet
nic
2018-05-21 13:03
hmm actually just changed my base image to node:8 and it seems to be working, as you were :smile:
matt
2018-05-21 13:04
if it was an alpine container, it just needs some musl libs. See the docker container for pact-mock-service and the verifier.
nic
2018-05-21 13:32
hey @matt so if I base my image off node:8.11.2 it works fine, off 8.11.2-alpine I get an error connecting to localhost on running the consumer tests
nic
2018-05-21 13:33
I looked at the dockerfile above which temporarily adds build-dependencies build-base to the alpine image. I added those to my dockerfile too but no dice
oswald.quek
2018-05-21 17:03
hmm.... so the BaseProviderRule only sets up the mock server just before a test is run: https://github.com/DiUS/pact-jvm/blob/master/pact-jvm-consumer-junit/src/main/java/au/com/dius/pact/consumer/BaseProviderRule.java#L80. shouldn't the mock server be set up the moment the BaseProviderRule is instantiated? that's because during an integration test I want to spin up my server, which depends on some pact provider; but when i spin up my server it needs to know its downstream dependencies, which is a pretty standard thing.
it means if i define a unit test class like
```
public class SomeTest {
@Rule
public PactProviderRule provider = new PactProviderRule("publicauth", this);
@Rule public DropwizardAppRule<PublicApiConfig> myAppServer = new DropwizardAppRule<>(
PublicApi.class,
resourceFilePath("config/test-config.yaml"),
config("connectorUrl", provider.getUrl()));
```
it's not gonna work because when provider.getUrl is called the mock server hasn't been started up yet.
any workarounds (apart from me making a PR)?
rcheeniyil
2018-05-21 21:59
Hey there, I'm working on a public API and consumers want to see contract testing. Right now I'm trying to figure out a way for consumers to submit provider states without giving consumers direct access to the production database. The first thought was to use API calls to setup the provider state, however that seems clunky for state setup and teardown for each test. Another thought was to develop a supporting service to batch requests for setup and teardown of tests. Are there any other known solutions for provider state setup for public API's currently implemented? Would also appreciate any thoughts on the problem of provider state setup.
Note: I have read https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-ruby/wiki/Why-Pact-may-not-be-the-best-tool-for-testing-public-APIs and the plan (so far) is to keep moving forward with pact
beth
2018-05-21 22:03
Firstly, can I ask about your verification process. Why would it be the _production_ database that the verification is running against? Can you use a non prod one?
beth
2018-05-21 22:06
You mentioned "giving consumers direct access to the database". Generally, it's the provider team that implements the verification side. Are you doing it differently?
beth
2018-05-21 22:07
The consumer team (in consultation with the provider team of course) generally comes up with the labels for the provider states, but the provide team is responsible for writing the code that takes that label and sets up the right state in the underlying datasource (or, alternatively, sets up a mock in the right state).
rcheeniyil
2018-05-21 22:08
The customer wants to submit contract tests to us so we'd also like to support the submission of provider states. It would be hard for us to maintain all the provider states customers would be writing tests against.
beth
2018-05-21 22:09
A well written pact test should be as flexible as possible with it's expectations of the response, so the exact values of particular data should not really matter.
beth
2018-05-21 22:09
One option is to set up a "base state" of agreed data, that is loaded before the pact tests are run.
beth
2018-05-21 22:10
You might have an agreed resource that has "an alligator with name mary and 3 children" and agreed resource that is always going to be empty.
rcheeniyil
2018-05-21 22:11
I don't think there's a base state that will satisfy all our customers which is why we're trying to avoid that solution at the moment.
beth
2018-05-21 22:12
I have an alternative suggestion for you. Have you used swagger on this project?
rcheeniyil
2018-05-21 22:13
I'm working with Instructure "canvas" I don't know the exact number of schools.
beth
2018-05-21 22:14
There is an alternative workflow, whereby the consumers write pact tests, and the provider writes a swagger document. The provider tests that the swagger document is correct by using a tool like dredd, and the pact is validated against the swagger document, instead of a running service.
beth
2018-05-21 22:15
You lose a little bit of confidence in the verification results because there is an extra layer of abstraction, but what you gain is the fact that you don't have to maintain any provider states for the pacts - only for the dredd tests, which you have complete control over.
beth
2018-05-21 22:18
The workflow is not documented well - I was just thinking I'd put something up on http://docs.pact.io about it.
beth
2018-05-21 22:19
Here's a brief description with a diagram https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79GKBYSqMIo#t=39m10s
abubics
2018-05-21 22:26
Pact is more intended to be run with unit tests. Your consumer should be modularly layered, so the API client is the only thing you're testing with Pact :)
abubics
2018-05-21 22:27
If you want to use a standalone mock or stub Pact server, if should be started in a separate before you start your integrated suite. But I'd be wary of that approach.
richard.jones
2018-05-22 04:34
Hi folks, I'm looking to implement webhook integration from our broker to fire off a Bamboo verification job. What I'm unclear on is how to get the results back to the broker. I believe the docs at https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact_broker/wiki/Provider-verification-results assume the use of the official ruby or java verifier programs - is that correct?
beth
2018-05-22 04:37
> branches should use a unique feature tag
The tag should be the name of the branch. It looks like your tags include a sha in them?
beth
2018-05-22 04:38
Yup. You'll have to implement your own verification publishing with your custom verifier.
richard.jones
2018-05-22 04:39
I'm happy to write the code to do the publishing, but I just need the clues about what/where to publish :smile:
richard.jones
2018-05-22 04:40
I'm poking around the ruby verifier but I don't ready ruby so well :disappointed:
beth
2018-05-22 04:42
`POST` to this relation with a document in the format `{"success": true, "providerApplicationVersion": "4.5.6"}`
richard.jones
2018-05-22 04:42
oh my. I hadn't really looked at those pb entries. there's a lot of goodies in there!
beth
2018-05-22 04:43
If you want to use tags with your verification publications, you'll see the code in there to do that too.
richard.jones
2018-05-22 04:43
I see stuff in there about tagging - which is great because I had questions about tagging but now I suspect I know the answers!
beth
2018-05-22 04:43
I think you'll need to grab the latest broker, because I only added one of the relations recently to make it easier.
beth
2018-05-22 04:45
If you have a hypermedia client in python, I'd recommend using one of those. Or, even better, a HAL client.
beth
2018-05-22 04:45
I actually wrote my own little one because I didn't want to bring in a dependency that might clash with the actual code under test - it didn't take long.
beth
2018-05-22 04:50
One thing to note is that you don't want to publish verification results from a local machine - just from the CI. So you'll want a flag that gets switched on only when you're on the CI.
oswald.quek
2018-05-22 08:29
Interesting. I kind of disagree - I've been on a few teams who don't really do unit tests if there are already integration tests. I can see the reasoning for that - I often find things are double tested with a unit and integration test. And for my integration tests I want to avoid using mock servers as much as possible.
oswald.quek
2018-05-22 08:30
But whether we agree or disagree, I think Pact as a tool should provide the option to start its server as soon as a @Rule is called. The job of a tool is to provide options so teams can choose what to do based on their philosophy.
abubics
2018-05-22 08:33
On the consumer side, Pact only provides a mock server . . . I?m not sure how you could avoid that for the use case you?re describing?
abubics
2018-05-22 08:34
you?re running an integration suite, so your service needs to know the URL (or similar) before it even starts, right?
abubics
2018-05-22 08:35
so you would need to pass it in as a startup parameter (somehow, maybe a command-line arg, or env var)
abubics
2018-05-22 08:35
the only way you could do that is by starting the independent service beforehand, or it might not be available by the time your test runs
abubics
2018-05-22 08:37
On the philosophy point, a tool could be opinionated or not. That will help you decide whether it?s appropriate for your use case :D
rholshausen
2018-05-22 08:40
@oswald.quek this is by design. Each test defines the interactions that are required, and a mock server is spun up just for that test.
oswald.quek
2018-05-22 09:38
@abubics my workflow is pretty standard - i'm doing standard integration tests to call an API. The API depends on a downstream service, e.g. authentication-service. rather than mocking the authentication-service, i'm thinking why not use the pact server. i could go down the unit test route as you say, and for the integration test i'd use a standard mock (i dunno, wiremock or something) for the authentication-service but that's just double the effort of writing mocks.
oswald.quek
2018-05-22 09:38
i think my workarounds are - start my service per unit test as well, or just specify a port number for the pact servers
abubics
2018-05-22 10:05
Your standard integration tests sound like integrated tests, if you need to run your application to run the tests :)
If that's the case, then you're testing multiple layers of your app, rather than just the API clients. You can use Pact in that way, but you might quickly find issues where you expect to verify behaviour, and Pact doesn't support that.
It really depends on your tests, but Pact's sweet spot is mocking and verifying individual network calls. Good luck :D let us know how you go!
richard.jones
2018-05-23 05:32
@beth I?m really new to HAL so I apologise if I?m wrong here but in the ?pb:tag-version? link in a pact I believe it should declare templated: true (less important) and also action: put?
richard.jones
2018-05-23 05:39
Hmm. I think maybe I might be making up the ?action? thing. Still learning, sorry. Pretty sure the ?templated? thing is correct tho.
beth
2018-05-23 05:40
It's the one thing I'm not keen on about hal - it doens't tell you what http methods are available
richard.jones
2018-05-23 05:40
I?m just stumbling my way thru the Python HAL/coreapi code to try to make sense of it all. The Link representation in Python has an action, which is used as the HTTP method when calling the link, but that doesn?t seem to come from HAL. I think it belongs to *other* coreapi standards, not HAL.
beth
2018-05-23 05:40
```
link :'pb:version-tag' do | options |
{
title: "Get, create or delete a tag for a version of #{represented.name}",
href: templated_tag_url_for_pacticipant(represented.name, options[:base_url]),
templated: true
}
end
```
richard.jones
2018-05-23 05:40
I just have to figure out how to make it work in the absence of that information from HAL now?
beth
2018-05-23 05:41
You need to get the provider using the provider relation, and then use the `pb:version-tag` relation in there.
richard.jones
2018-05-23 05:43
nono, I meant the provider relation having pb:version-tag - yeah, I?m going to ask for an upgrade
beth
2018-05-23 05:44
Yes, that's new. Let's move this to a thread if you need to discuss it any more.
richard.jones
2018-05-23 05:45
yep. as an organisation we?re only just starting to look at tags :slightly_smiling_face:
richard.jones
2018-05-23 05:45
(I?m only just putting the result publication stuff in the verifier, hence the stumbling around in HAL and related code)
beth
2018-05-23 05:49
```
Broker user: dXfltyFMgNOFZAxr8io9wJ37iUpY42M
Broker password: O5AIZWxelWbLvqMd8PkAVycBJh2Psyg1
https://test.pact.dius.com.au
```
oswald.quek
2018-05-23 07:03
It works I guess! https://github.com/alphagov/pay-publicapi/pull/177. Admittedly there's only one test in my DirectDebitPaymentTest.java so the effect on multiple tests has still yet to be seen. If you spot any potential issues, do let me know.
abubics
2018-05-23 07:20
So, you run your app, hit its public API with the interactions described in one pact file, and expect more interactions from another pact file coming out the other end?
oswald.quek
2018-05-23 08:29
yes am moving on to upstream dependencies to verify the pact. we already have them for other pacts (where the consumer is a nodejs app). but this is the first time we're doing jvm consumer pact.
abubics
2018-05-23 08:31
right now your back-end pacts are coupled to your front-end pacts in a way . . . it?ll be interesting to see if that has problems later (or not)
richard.jones
2018-05-23 22:48
Is the broker supposed to be detecting duplicate verification results? I was testing yesterday against our dev broker and I can see multiple results in the Matrix for the same pact and provider version. The only thing that differs is the verificationDate.
beth
2018-05-23 23:11
It ignores duplicate pact publications, but I haven't built in logic to ignore duplicate verification results. It's not a bad idea though.
richard.jones
2018-05-23 23:38
I?ve looked, but I can?t see anything that will tell me whether a verification result has been posted.
niek
2018-05-24 07:22
Hi,
I found a tweet stating 'and you can integrate [swagger] with the broker too' but i found no way to feed the broker swagger files.
https://twitter.com/pact_up/status/936395546083827712
beth
2018-05-24 07:24
Unfortunately we haven't added that part, so you'll need to put the swagger document in another place. Perhaps swagger hub?
beth
2018-05-24 07:27
It's something we see a lot of value in doing, but just haven't had the time yet
richard.jones
2018-05-30 00:10
Is there a way to register a webhook by provider (not pact) so that we even get notifications when new consumers register and we don?t need to then discover the new consumer and add a new webhook to that consumer?
beth
2018-05-30 08:27
The steps to reaching Pact Nirvana link for pinning: https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vRf1kSDccImNipOOm1G-bjcSs-ifbZjf1v54K-dIcq8BLKeFPAAm_bf_p71UKqkRMIx30QWWL-kN8TI/pub
sharding
2018-05-30 20:44
I have a pretty beginner question. So I have read a few articles that have examples that include the consumer and provider tests in the same place, it seems that the examples that I have seen generally do all the testing within the provider. Is a pact broker a way of splitting up the tests so I do not have to have them in the same place, kind of like a db that the consumer and provider can pull from?
matt
2018-05-30 22:28
Pretty much. The broker is really just the best way to share the contract and verification results to multiple consumers and providers, and provides a number of advanced features that you?ll inevitably want to implement.
abubics
2018-05-30 22:32
Also, you don't really write tests for the provider; the pact is the tests :) you just write a bit of known before-state
matt
2018-05-30 22:33
yep. And the examples with both consumer and provider in the same place are more for the sake of convenience - in reality they are almost always in separate repositories and in many cases, managed by separate teams
beth
2018-05-31 01:02
@sharding I've just added the following to the FAQ, inspired by your question
> The consumer team is responsible for implementing the Pact tests in the consumer codebase that will generate the contract, and for publishing it to a shared location (usually a [Pact Broker][pact-broker]). The provider team is responsible for setting up the Pact verification task in the provider codebase, and for writing the code that sets up the correct data for each `provider state` described in the contract. Both teams are responsible for collaborating and communicating about the API and its usage! Remember that contracts are not a substitute for good communication between teams.
abubics
2018-05-31 01:26
Maybe we can make that clearer? My coffee API repos are mostly tiny and separate :)
thadir
2018-06-01 08:33
@beth at what version is our hosted pact running (I cant see the version on the UI, maybe a cool feature if you send us mail like that).
matt
2018-06-01 10:54
We could find a way. The examples in the repo are built and tested with each change (to ensure both backwards compatibility and also to ensure we have working examples), which is a bit harder to do when they are separated
abubics
2018-06-01 23:54
I guess there?s a difference between ?test examples for making sure pact works? and ?ideal example project samples? :3
beth
2018-06-02 08:47
We have been alerted to a vulnerability in the Pact Broker webhooks and have released a fix in version 2.19.2. The latest Docker image has been upgraded to this version. If you're unsure of the version of your current installation, you'll find the version number in the X-Pact-Broker-Version header in the API Browser. Please upgrade your instance as soon as possible.
beth
2018-06-03 09:49
one of the new improvements in the latest broker release is that interaction order within the pact is now ignored when determining equality. Many test frameworks run tests in random order, so often a pact would appear changed, when really, it was just a reordering of an existing pact. This new change means that more pacts will be "pre-verified" now, and won't kick off provider builds unnecessarily.
beth
2018-06-03 09:50
@kevin.meiresonne this should fix the problem you had - you can revert those changes you made to make the tests deterministic in order.
richard.jones
2018-06-03 22:26
On a related note I was looking at randomising the run order in my verifier (we have run into one provider with leaky state already)
matthew.ceroni
2018-06-04 22:38
Trying to understand ?version? in pact broker. The documentation has me a little confused. First, there is an internal pact version that the broker maintains itself. The version I specify in the URL when uploading a pact is the consumer version against which a provider will be verified
matthew.ceroni
2018-06-04 22:40
How is the latest version determined? In reading the documentation I settled on setting an version of semver+gitsha (example: 1.2.0+f9d5325)
matthew.ceroni
2018-06-04 22:41
But if I upload a new version (1.2.1+?.) and I call (http://pact.services.internal/pacts/provider/node-helloworld/consumer/angular-helloworld/latest) it returns the 1.2.0 version
beth
2018-06-04 23:00
@matthew.ceroni Have you read https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact_broker/wiki/Pacticipant-version-numbers
beth
2018-06-04 23:00
Also, there is an excellent document on versioning written by @tjones. Tim, can you post the link to it?
matthew.ceroni
2018-06-04 23:09
beth, I did read the first link around versioning and that left me a little confused :slightly_smiling_face: but I will read the last link you sent. Thanks.
beth
2018-06-04 23:33
Actually, here it is https://docs.pact.io/getting-started/versioning-in-the-pact-broker
beth
2018-06-04 23:34
Have a look at the pinned link in this channel titled "The Steps to Reaching Pact Nirvana".
biaofu
2018-06-07 06:44
Hi guys, I know this channel is for Pact Broker, is there any slack channel I can ask some questions about general practice of Pact or Contract Test? :slightly_smiling_face:
richard.jones
2018-06-07 22:59
Oh, there?s a separate slack for pact? I didn?t realise (I?m not sure how I got the invite to this slack, but I assumed it was ?the? slack for pact. I think maybe all the questions I?ve been asking here should have been there, sorry!
beth
2018-06-07 23:01
This one was created to support the DiUS hosted Pact Broker customers, but we do often just discuss general pact questions anyway. It's better to discuss them in the other channel though, because then other people get the benefit of the discussion.
abubics
2018-06-07 23:02
Plus this team's been here a lot longer :) the general Pact Slack team only opened a few weeks ago
matthew.ceroni
2018-06-07 23:29
Updated config on pact broker to order versions by date.
Restarted pact, but still not ordering based on date.
matthew.ceroni
2018-06-07 23:30
I have uploaded a new pact with a different consumer version (1.0.0+SHA) but the tags show latest on the old version, not the new
beth
2018-06-07 23:35
Note that the versions get ordered when you create a new version resource (usually when you publish a pact).
matthew.ceroni
2018-06-07 23:35
I did that. What I did was then just re-run my same build which uploaded with the same consumer version
beth
2018-06-07 23:35
So you'll need to create a pact with an entirely new version for it to re-trigger.
matt
2018-06-08 02:16
It may be worth consolidating the two slacks. I expect many pact users to also have an interest in the broker.
What do you think about the pact broker slack becoming a channel on the pact slack? Then this slack could be archived.
abubics
2018-06-08 02:46
I actually don?t mind the duality :upside_down_face: but it?s probably not necessary :P
matt
2018-06-08 03:12
/poll ?We have two Pact Slack accounts - http://slack.pact.io and this one. Should we? ?Keep both? ?Migrate to http://slack.pact.io? ?Meh?
matt
2018-06-08 03:17
But it?s less about that, and more about ensuring information is effectively shared to our community. Having two Slack accounts means that some people who aren?t in both miss out
richard.jones
2018-06-08 06:07
I'm not sure I should have a say, but I'm going to leave this slack server regardless as I think all my questions should be on the other server anyway :smile:
travi
2018-06-08 14:50
the one downside might be less history because of more conversations unless it is a paid account
gbeckmann
2018-06-08 15:44
I vote for consolidating, we had confusion here at Instructure as different groups of people all though they were in the ?pact? channel - not realizing there were two. :slightly_smiling_face:
matt
2018-06-09 01:24
@travi I?ll make sure we export whatever we can (it?s not a paid account): https://get.slack.help/hc/en-us/articles/217872578-Merge-Slack-workspaces
travi
2018-06-09 01:25
Not something I'm personally too concerned about. Just mentioning as something to consider
beth
2018-06-09 01:52
I'd suggest we have a channel for the hosted broker users, because there are announcements and discussions that are only relevant to that group.
asfan.siddiqui
2018-06-13 09:06
I want to use the pact broker webhook with gitlab but apparently there is no plugin for configuring pact webhook with gitlab that i can use to trigger the provider api build in gitlab once pact changes.I am trying to setup the build pipeline on gitlab.Need help on this .
beth
2018-06-13 09:38
I just googled "gitlab trigger build API" and found this: https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/ci/triggers/
beth
2018-06-13 09:40
When you've worked it out, can you add it to https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact_broker/wiki/Webhook-template-library
oswald.quek
2018-06-13 12:48
so... we have a situation. a consumer (e.g. service A) has pacts with service B and C. these are in the pact broker, and service B and C have provider tests to provide verification. now service A write a new pact with service D and publishes to pact broker. no provider tests have been written for service D yet. when i want to deploy service A, i ask the pact broker "can-i-deploy"? The answer is no because there's no verification between A and D yet. it does seem like "can-i-deploy" (https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact_broker-client#can-i-deploy) doesn't allow to ignore a pact between A and D. are there any workarounds around this?
kevin.meiresonne
2018-06-13 12:53
Well, it makes sense that can-i-deploy returns "no", as there's indeed no way to guarantee your consumer will work without having service D's verification.
What I would suggest is that you should implement your new pact changes in for instance feature branches. Your "can-i-deploy" can then be run against your master pacts.
Once your new pact is ready (consumer + provider) you can push it to master, and can-i-deploy will start taking it into account.
kevin.meiresonne
2018-06-13 12:53
See "Step 5" of the "reaching pact nirvana" post: https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vRf1kSDccImNipOOm1G-bjcSs-ifbZjf1v54K-dIcq8BLKeFPAAm_bf_p71UKqkRMIx30QWWL-kN8TI/pub
oswald.quek
2018-06-13 13:33
yeah we have step 8 in one of our projects. i guess some devs were too eager and published a load of tests without there being a provider test!
oswald.quek
2018-06-13 13:34
we don't have continuous deployment, so there were a few versions of consumer waiting to be deployed. during that time someone published a new pact
kevin.meiresonne
2018-06-13 13:36
I guess perhaps you can remove the pact from the broker for now, or tag it differently so that can-i-deploy doesn't look at it?
matt
2018-06-13 14:06
As an aside, you can run can-i-deploy and specify the pacticipants to include in the check. By default it includes all. You can see all options with the help command
oswald.quek
2018-06-13 14:46
so `pact-broker can-i-deploy --pacticipant serviceA --latest TAG --pacticipant serviceB --latest TAG` for example
beth
2018-06-13 20:08
Yes. I have considered adding an `--ignore-missing` but you're the first person to actually ask for it. It seems you have a work around though.
oswald.quek
2018-06-15 11:17
it might be good to add it anyway i think, while specifying the pacts to ignore, e.g. `--ignore-missing serviceD`.
rlamb
2018-06-19 19:22
Where do I find the doc on how to add users with basic auth to the pact-broker-docker?
niedra91
2018-07-26 07:47
Hi everybody! I?m trying to integrate Pact with a SCIM connector for the needs of a project. The development environment is Java + Maven. I checked out the Workshop project which helped me to understand the integration steps. Using this project and the pact-jvm project, I could successfully write a UT for the connector using Pact Mock Server. I described the Pact using Java 8 Lambda.
At this point, I wanna go further and:
1/ Incorporate matchers for the Pact
2/ ?Build? the Pact as json data, as it?s done within the workshop project, but from the Java-8 DSL. I don?t need at the moment to automatically export the generated Pact to the provider through the pact broker.
3/ Test the generated pact against the real provider.
I?m kind of stucked here.
1/ I looked in the matchers sub-project of pact-jvm, but could find only Scala or Kotlin classes. Are there any matchers for the Java DSL? Where could I find revelant documentation?
2/ I didn?t see any way to build the Pact in java. Is there a sample maven plugin available?
Thanks in advance for your support :slightly_smiling_face:
mr.matt.r.long
2018-08-07 11:04
Hi guys, anyone know why I'm getting 405 responses when POSTing webhooks to the broker? I don't have basic auth configured right now, so little miffed!?
biercoff
2019-02-08 16:25
Hi guys. Small question. I have a provider that provides a big json payload. And i also have bunch of consumers - each of them is interested in part of this payload. Does every consumer has to specify full provider payload in the contract, or they can specify only structure they are interested ?
tjones
2019-02-11 03:50
Each consumer test describes only the parts of the contract (and therefore the payload) that they need for that test
tjones
2019-02-11 03:50
In this way, a Pact doesn't describe the API, it describes the parts of the contract that the consumer relies on.
shefeeque85
2019-06-22 18:57
Hello guys...where can I find some examples of .minArrayLike for lambda Dsl
matt.fellows
2019-06-24 02:24
Guys this is an old channel from migrating another slack group. I'm going to close this, sorry you will have to move your chat elsewhere (possibly #pact-jvm )