has joined #pact-go

/github subscribe pact-foundation/pact-go

has joined #pact-go

/github subscribe pact-foundation/pact-go releases

/github unsubscribe pact-foundation/pact-go commits

/github unsubscribe pact-foundation/pact-go public

/github unsubscribe pact-foundation/pact-go deployments

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

Is the README out of sync? I?m getting `undefined: dsl.MapMatcher` when using the example and I?m running v0.0.13 revision 1567bdaba1c9bccb747cfba1ade5e09b9ccf5eea

@elliot.chen7 it shouldn't be, but it's possible. I'll take a look this morning

Thanks, also do I need to have a daemon running? From the looks of the doc it says pact-go shouldn?t need one?

No you shouldn't need one. It's all just the usual `go get`, but you do need some binaries on the PATH as per readme

Did `go get http://gopkg.in/pact-foundation/pact-go.v1` change then ?

Getting `unrecognized import path`

has joined #pact-go

i'd like to ask few questions. i was trying `pact-go/examples`. but i've got some troubles. 1. how to execute `./pact-go daemon`. is the file exists in pact-go repogitory? 2. i couldn't run `consumer_test.go` and `provider_test.go`. i've got these message. is this example not recent? ``` $ go test -v -run TestProvider # _/Users/dorako321/pact-go/examples ./consumer_test.go:22: unknown field 'Port' in struct literal of type dsl.Pact ./consumer_test.go:55: cannot use "/foobar" (type string) as type dsl.StringMatcher in field value: string does not implement dsl.StringMatcher (missing GetValue method) ./consumer_test.go:56: cannot use map[string]string literal (type map[string]string) as type dsl.MapMatcher in field value ./consumer_test.go:61: cannot use map[string]string literal (type map[string]string) as type dsl.MapMatcher in field value ./provider_test.go:28: unknown field 'Port' in struct literal of type dsl.Pact FAIL _/Users/dorako321/pact-go/examples [build failed] ```

I?ll take a look @elliot.chen7 @yamad. We?re transitioning to a new API, so it?s quite possible

OK yep, there was definitely a couple of examples out of date - funnily enough, the only 2 that don?t run as part of CI.

Fixed in all branches, sorry about that!

has joined #pact-go

Thanks @matt.fellows! I?ll give it another try tomorrow

:+1:

has joined #pact-go

is there a golang version of pact I need to install to pact test golang code?

@matt.fellows it working perfectly now. thanks. good product.

I tried this command `go get -d http://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-go` and it executed without error but when I run `go test-v .` i get an error ``` :> go test -v . === RUN TestPact_GoKitProvider 2018/07/10 08:24:29 [DEBUG] pact setup logging 2018/07/10 08:24:29 [DEBUG] pact setup 2018/07/10 08:24:29 [DEBUG] checking CLI compatability 2018/07/10 08:24:29 [INFO] checking pact-mock-service within range >= 2.6.4, < 3.0.0 2018/07/10 08:24:29 [DEBUG] running binary pact-mock-service 2018/07/10 08:24:29 [ERROR] CLI tools are out of date, please upgrade before continuing FAIL http://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-go/examples/go-kit/provider 0.027s ```

Awesome, sorry about those. Any questions do let us know

Have you installed the CLI tools?

It's a bit misleading, I'll update that first section of the docs. But you need to first have some tools in your path first

@matt.fellows does this install method work for mac?

the `some tools` isnt clear. i assumed that `go get -d http://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-go` would install everything i need but it didnt seem to work

I had the same understanding as @alex.bednarczyk and got the same error when I first tried

@elliot.chen7 did you get it working?

@alex.bednarczyk ah, I see the problem in our docs. We have a links section with all of the re-usable links but they aren?t rendering for some reason. I?ll take a look. Apologies

the `[CLI Tools]` should link to https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-ruby-standalone/releases

and yes, that should work on a Mac

What have you tried?

Docs updated, links have been restored

I tried NPM install pact, the instructions don?t have the global arg so i?m a little confused how pact would be available gloally

also tried the ruby standalone but i cant find the error i got from that

`go get -d http://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-go` might have done something but `pact` didnt work after so a step might be missing

@alex.bednarczyk npm?

`npm i @pact-foundation/pact-standalone`

Those three steps are all you need: 1. Download the appropriate zip file for your platform from https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-ruby-standalone/releases 2. Ensure the files in the extracted `bin` dir are on your `PATH` 3. then you can go get

is there somewhere that says to use npm? If so, it?s confusing and it needs to be corrected

let me look

thanks

I think I was trying to get something installed.

let me look at the readme again. ill have some feedback tomorrow. thanks for responding

I unzipped the tgz and moved all files in the bin directory to /Users/alex/bin which is in my path ```:> pact /Users/alex/bin/pact: line 27: /Users/alex/lib/ruby/bin/ruby: No such file or directory```

@alex.bednarczyk the easiest way to install the standalone is to use https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-ruby-standalone/blob/master/install.sh

What is your OS?

Also, @alex.bednarczyk @matt.fellows let's move this to a thread so we're not spamming the whole channel.

macos

trying the install.sh now

``` bethtemp $ curl -fsSL https://raw.githubusercontent.com/pact-foundation/pact-ruby-standalone/master/install.sh | bash % Total % Received % Xferd Average Speed Time Time Time Current Dload Upload Total Spent Left Speed 100 612 0 612 0 0 652 0 --:--:-- --:--:-- --:--:-- 652 100 7435k 100 7435k 0 0 651k 0 0:00:11 0:00:11 --:--:-- 1376k bethtemp $ ./pact/bin/pact Commands: pact docs # Generate Pact documentation in markdown pact help [COMMAND] # Describe available commands or one specific command pact verify -h, --pact-helper=PACT_HELPER # Verify a pact ```

```:> ./install.sh % Total % Received % Xferd Average Speed Time Time Time Current Dload Upload Total Spent Left Speed 100 612 0 612 0 0 2398 0 --:--:-- --:--:-- --:--:-- 2390 100 7435k 100 7435k 0 0 1248k 0 0:00:05 0:00:05 --:--:-- 1552k```

ok let me try your command

```:> curl -fsSL https://raw.githubusercontent.com/pact-foundation/pact-ruby-standalone/master/install.sh | bash % Total % Received % Xferd Average Speed Time Time Time Current Dload Upload Total Spent Left Speed 100 612 0 612 0 0 2235 0 --:--:-- --:--:-- --:--:-- 2241 100 7435k 100 7435k 0 0 1943k 0 0:00:03 0:00:03 --:--:-- 2369k```

stops there

yes, that's fine.

Then run pact/bin/pact

```:> pact/bin/pact Commands: pact docs # Generate Pact documentation in markdown pact help [COMMAND] # Describe available commands or one specific command pact verify -h, --pact-helper=PACT_HELPER # Verify a pact```

looks like it's working.

ok great. ill try the go test command

```:> go test -v . === RUN TestConsumer 2018/07/10 19:14:53 [INFO] checking pact-provider-verifier within range >= 1.12.0, < 3.0.0 2018/07/10 19:14:53 [ERROR] CLI tools are out of date, please upgrade before continuing FAIL http://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-go/examples 0.025s```

@matt.fellows?

@alex.bednarczyk look at the readme in the top pact dir. It will list all the versions used.

@bethskurrie do I need to do anything with the `pact/bin/pact` file?

no

ok, its in `~/projects/test/pact-ruby-standalone`

The readme?

go is in `~/go/src/github.com/pact-foundation/pact-go/examples`

No, it's in pact/README.md

The standalone that you installed has a readme.md in it.

ok i see it

```This version (1.49.0) of the Pact standalone executables package contains: * pact gem 1.28.0 * pact-mock_service gem 2.9.1 * pact-support gem 1.6.2 * pact-provider-verifier gem 1.14.4 * pact_broker-client gem 1.16.0 * pact-message gem 0.4.5```

So, that logic that says it's out of date is mistaken.

Matt will be able to help you, but he's currently busy.

ok

you need to add that folder (l?m just guessing, but from what you?ve been saying it will be something like: `~/projects/test/pact-ruby-standalone/pact/bin/`) to your `PATH`: e.g. ``` PATH="${PATH}:~/projects/test/pact-ruby-standalone/pact/bin/" ```

Pact Go can?t run a binary if it can?t find it

It looks like you've got the pact-ruby-standalone project checked out?

It looks like you _moved_ the binaries - you can?t do that

yea i have it checked out

i added the `bin` dir to my path and the tests executed

```:> go test -v . === RUN TestConsumer 2018/07/11 08:09:31 [INFO] checking pact-provider-verifier within range >= 1.12.0, < 3.0.0 2018/07/11 08:09:32 [INFO] checking pact-broker within range >= 1.14.0, < 2.0.0 2018/07/11 08:09:33 [INFO] checking pact-mock-service within range >= 2.6.4, < 3.0.0 2018/07/11 08:09:34 [ERROR] service: [2018-07-11 08:09:34] INFO WEBrick 1.3.1 2018/07/11 08:09:34 [ERROR] service: [2018-07-11 08:09:34] INFO ruby 2.2.2 (2015-04-13) [x86_64-darwin13] 2018/07/11 08:09:34 [ERROR] service: [2018-07-11 08:09:34] INFO WEBrick::HTTPServer#start: pid=15046 port=58415 Test Passed! 2018/07/11 08:09:34 [ERROR] service: [2018-07-11 08:09:34] INFO going to shutdown ... 2018/07/11 08:09:34 [ERROR] service: [2018-07-11 08:09:34] INFO WEBrick::HTTPServer#start done. 2018/07/11 08:09:34 [INFO] INFO: Writing pact before shutting down 2018/07/11 08:09:34 [INFO] 2018/07/11 08:09:34 [INFO] Writing pact for MyProvider to /Users/alex/go/src/github.com/pact-foundation/pact-go/examples/pacts/myconsumer-myprovider.json --- PASS: TestConsumer (3.04s) === RUN TestProvider 2018/07/11 08:09:34 [INFO] checking pact-provider-verifier within range >= 1.12.0, < 3.0.0 2018/07/11 08:09:35 [INFO] checking pact-broker within range >= 1.14.0, < 2.0.0 2018/07/11 08:09:35 [INFO] checking pact-mock-service within range >= 2.6.4, < 3.0.0 === RUN TestProvider/has_status_code_200 === RUN TestProvider/has_a_matching_body === RUN TestProvider/"Content-Type"_which_equals_"application/json" --- PASS: TestProvider (2.23s) --- PASS: TestProvider/has_status_code_200 (0.00s) pact.go:314: Verifying a pact between MyConsumer and MyProvider Given User foo exists A request to get foo with GET /foobar returns a response which has status code 200 --- PASS: TestProvider/has_a_matching_body (0.00s) pact.go:314: Verifying a pact between MyConsumer and MyProvider Given User foo exists A request to get foo with GET /foobar returns a response which has a matching body --- PASS: TestProvider/"Content-Type"_which_equals_"application/json" (0.00s) pact.go:314: Verifying a pact between MyConsumer and MyProvider Given User foo exists A request to get foo with GET /foobar returns a response which includes headers "Content-Type" which equals "application/json" PASS ok http://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-go/examples 5.292s```

are these errors ok?

Looks OK to me. Not sure why they're prefixed with ERROR.

I'll double check. There was a bug a while ago where things were being interpreted as if they were from stderr.

But if there is a pact file created, it's working

@bethskurrie I?ll ping you in a sec

How did you go Alex?

btw is this one you https://github.com/alexeits? Is this also yours? https://medium.com/@sagansystems/integration-testing-our-microservices-for-fun-and-profit-b749ef42703b

@matt.fellows I've worked out how to send that log to stdout. It's in the latest standalone 1.51.0

has joined #pact-go

> ? 2e0f236 - upgrade(broker): allow pb:pacts and pacts HAL links to be followed (Matt Fellows, Sun May 20 13:15:52 2018 +1000) ? 808ebfa - fix(broker): use 'pb:pacts' instead 'pacts'. See #82 (Matt Fellows, Fri May 18 22:55:20 2018 +1000) Thank you for noticing @matt.fellows!

:smile:

I want to move the pact retrieval into the ruby standalone so that I can put the WIP pacts stuff into there and roll it out to all the languages. it will help the problem where we have to configure the ssl for both the wrapper language and the ruby code as well.

From what I've seen in the js, the configuration options are the provider name, and a list of tags?

`--provider Foo --tag prod --tag master`?

Yep, it makes complete sense.

Rashi has actually already done the ruby code, i just have to hook it up to the command line

I?ll have a quick look, I think that?s correct

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

Hello, I am working with pact hosted broker. I have a golang docker image with pact installed in it. I build the image and when try to run consumer integration tests it fails, knowing that when running it independently it works and upload the contracts to the broker. I think it is an issue in creating json contracts locally. Any help regarding this issue would be appreciated :question:

I believe this issue is related to the below https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-js/issues/154

Have you tried the fix suggested by the issue you mention @rabih?

yes and worked just fine

:+1:

:+1:

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

my provider test does not seem to ever end and i'm forced to terminate the process can anyone help?

``` // +build contract package rest import ( "encoding/json" "fmt" "log" "net/http" "os" "path/filepath" "testing" "http://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-go/dsl" "http://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-go/types" ) var port = 8000 var dir, _ = os.Getwd() var pactDir = fmt.Sprintf("%s/../../../pacts", dir) var logDir = fmt.Sprintf("%s/logs", dir) func TestProvider(t *testing.T) { // Start provider API in the background go startServer() // Create Pact connecting to local Daemon pact := &dsl.Pact{ Consumer: "client", Provider: "paymentService", Host: "localhost", LogDir: logDir, PactDir: pactDir, DisableToolValidityCheck: true, } // log.Println("Start verify ", []string{filepath.ToSlash(fmt.Sprintf("%s\\buildreader-bringon.json", pactDir))}, // fmt.Sprintf("http://localhost:%d/setup", port), fmt.Sprintf("http://localhost:%d", port), fmt.Sprintf("%s\\buildReader-bringon.json", pactDir)) // Verify the Provider with local Pact Files _, err := pact.VerifyProvider(t, types.VerifyRequest{ ProviderBaseURL: fmt.Sprintf("http://localhost:%d", port), PactURLs: []string{filepath.ToSlash(fmt.Sprintf("%s/client-paymentservice.json", pactDir))}, ProviderStatesSetupURL: fmt.Sprintf("http://localhost:%d/setup", port), }) if err != nil { t.Fatal("Error:", err) } } func startServer() { mux := http.NewServeMux() lastName := "billy" mux.HandleFunc("/foobar", func(w http.ResponseWriter, req *http.Request) { w.Header().Add("Content-Type", "application/json") fmt.Fprintf(w, fmt.Sprintf(`{"name":"billy", "lastName":"%s"}`, lastName)) // Break the API by replacing the above and uncommenting one of these // w.WriteHeader(http.StatusUnauthorized) // fmt.Fprintf(w, `{"s":"baz"}`) }) // This function handles state requests for a particular test // In this case, we ensure that the user being requested is available // before the Verification process invokes the API. mux.HandleFunc("/setup", func(w http.ResponseWriter, req *http.Request) { var s *types.ProviderState decoder := json.NewDecoder(req.Body) decoder.Decode(&s) if s.State == "User foo exists" { lastName = "bagr" } w.Header().Add("Content-Type", "application/json") }) log.Fatal(http.ListenAndServe(":8000", mux)) } ```

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

hello, any help regarding the below issue:(note that I am using option PactFileWriteMode: ?update?) /pact/lib/ruby/lib/ruby/gems/2.2.0/gems/bundler-1.9.9/lib/bundler/shared_helpers.rb:78: warning: Insecure world writable dir /go/bin in PATH, mode 040777

I've seen it before on a wercker build. It's a warning, so shouldn't affect any builds

The answer is in the warning - it's telling you /go/bin had insecure permissions on it. Make it more secure, and it will go away

I have 2 micro-services, first one has GET rest APIs and the other has the POST APIs. Is there a way that the two services could update the same pact consumer and provider? Since what is happening now is that the last integration tests ran will override pacts. Any advice regarding this issue?

has joined #pact-go

Hi all, I have issue in Message pact testing, So the contract has a message with contents, when the provider try to validate this message the dsl.Message is an empty struct, so the question here, the message should have been parsed with the json message found in the contract?

has joined #pact-go

Hi, quick question. When verifying a pact using the go provider, e.g. ``` res, err := pact.VerifyProvider(...) ``` If no consumers have published pacts the provider verification fails with an ambiguous error - ?Pact URLs is mandatory?. Is this the expected behavior? From memory (I might be wrong) the same scenario in the jvm verifier just skips the test if no consumers are defined. How might I achieve this in go since it?s quite convenient when setting stuff up initially? Cheers

hmm I recall this coming up before, but can?t quite remember the discussion :smile:

one the one hand, not finding any consumers might be a signal something is wrong. On the other hand, perhaps you?re searching for tags (andn therefore consumers) that don?t yet exist, and therefore it isn?t a problem yet.

Could you please raise an issue to track on the github repo?

Thanks Matt. Will do.

Sorry for the late response, did you get this sorted?

Hi @matt.fellows, actually no, I am still getting an empty dsl.Message. You can find the below code for your reference. Please advice how MQ pact works. ``` "an event created": func(m dsl.Message) (interface{}, error) { myEvent := m.Content.(*MyEvent) // This is not working, only getting state and message description in m //The below is working since it is comparing it with the message in the contract myCreatedEvent, err := prepareEvent() return myCreatedEvent, err }, ```

The provider will never receive the message - it's the one sending it to a queue in the first place!. Pact will invoke that function and expect it to populate the returning interface {} with the response, which is then compared to the contract.

yes, that?s what I figured out

Thank you

Do you think we could make this clearer on the docs? If so, what do you think we should do differently?

I?d suggest to have more related examples to message queueing like integration with RabbitMQ, Nats, Kafka. Since the example provided for messages is translated from the API examples, which I think is not a valid use case for message queueing. Thank you

Thanks Rabieh. Some good advice for the backlog :slightly_smiling_face:

PR?s welcome, too :smile:

has joined #pact-go

about this specific issue

I'm not sure if this is an issue or not

I'm trying to debug it locally

I saw the server I start is starting in a port (eg 55756) and the mock service on other one (eg 55757)

I'm not sure what is this mock service

In `client.go` we can find this code: ``` port := getPort(request.ProviderBaseURL) waitForPort(port, p.getNetworkInterface(), p.Address, fmt.Sprintf(`Timed out waiting for Provider API to start on port %d - are you sure it's running?`, port)) ```

In the `for select` on `waitForPort`, the first time the `net.Dial` dials to the correct port (57420, for example), but the second time it dials to 0

Is this deliberate?

hi @lucas.beier, thanks for raising the issue. I can?t quite reproduce your code but will publish to our test broker and go from there

The port `0` doesn?tt look deliberate, so i?s possible something else has gone awry before that point to cause issues.

During consumer side testing, the mock service is what records the interactions and is your ?dummy? provider. It?s not used on provider verification, however.

OK,. I?ve just published your pacts to our hosted broker (http://test.pact.dius.com.au)

Passing as expected, I think

My guess is that perhaps it can?t find the CLI tools

Can you please test without `DisableToolValidityCheck: true`?

Hello, I have a question, is it possible to test 2 different consumer against same provider?

Yes

Absolutely!

we are testing the two pacts in the same file, is it a problem?

Can you elaborate on what you mean? You'll need to ensure you setup so that each test directs the interactions at separate mock providers

so we are initializing two pacts, the first is for Consumer1 and Provider1, the second is for Consumer2 and Provider1, we have a TestMain function and multiple testing functions where we are adding the function mapping in each unit tests with the specific pact, and at the end of the TestMain we are calling provider validation

I?m not sure this is a good idea. Each consumer/provider testing should be done in isolation from one another. Is there are reason why they are coupled like this?

so according to CQRS, we have command service and query service, where command ones can consume events from multiple query services

Sure, but you can still separate out the tests for the query and command consumers. Perhaps if you could share some code that would help. In short, you can most definitely share multiple consumers for a single provider

my issue is resolved, so instead, I used one pact for the provider without specifying a consumer, so now it is validating all consumers with one provider

has any one worked with versioning pact with CI builds and github?

might want to ask in #general or #pact-broker

but yes, it?s common :slightly_smiling_face:

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

Hi, is it possible to force the name for consumer/provider instead of getting this message(other than creating manually): The name ?ServicesProvider? is very similar to the following existing consumers/providers: * providers_api If you meant to specify one of the above names, please correct the pact configuration, and re-publish the pact.

Best asking this in the #pact-broker channel, but the answer is yes (maybe).

Are you using the hosted version or your own?

Hi folks, I've made a few significant changes to pact go tonight and am looking for feedback.

1. Deprecated need for the annoying states setup URL in favour of registering simple state handler functions 2. Added before and after hooks to invoke during test lifecycle 3. Added Request Filter middleware where you can intercept requests to the provider, enabling use cases such as updating bearer tokens https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-go/tree/feat/hooks-api

This is based on feedback on forums as well as usage and adoption in the JS dsl which I also maintain.

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

Hello! has anyone ever worked with building query params to allow for the rails flavor of arrays in params?

`names[]=ENV1&names[]=ENV2`

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

Hi, I am pretty new to PACT and I find myself stuck with the following situation: I want to match a stream response of type text/plain which looks similar to: {"Id": 1224, "Name": "Ana", "Age": 5} {"Id": 34, "Name": "Lele", "Age": 4} I know it can be done with regex but I am interested in actually checking if each row is of a certain object type, similar to EackLike("Person") which works if response is json - array of objects. Do you have any suggestion? Or how a custom Matcher would look like?

has anyone tried something similar or is there any post with more details on custom matcher in go? and how would the pact file be interpreted by a provider in another language (like Java) if the matcher is not built in type?

Hmmm why text/plain?

One option would be to parse it into JSON before handing it off to Pact, but that has its drawbacks

(also I saw your note in gophers, but the real Pact audience is here...)

yes, I was trying to get an answer and the gophers was the first channel I saw, then I red about this one. But if I change the response to json it means I am not testing the actual response of the provider

> But if I change the response to json it means I am not testing the actual response of the provider Yes, that is the drawback :wink:

I refer you to the pragmatism principle

You?ll need to weigh up the value of maintaining the tests vs potential for reality to get out of sync.

Obviously, it would be ideal to do the plain text match. There is currently no (published) way to add / extend the matchers, and if you did, you?d need to somehow make the pact file it generates compatible with other implementations, else it wouldn?t work if it needed to be verified by, say, Java

The specification for the pact file is https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-specification/

ok, got it. thank you for the response. Ideally, I would have wanted something like the EachLike and check for a object type, since with regex order is important and it's hard to cover optional fields and values, but I will reconsider probably the enforcement on the response

Yes.

Currently, all of the matching logic is performed by a Ruby process (for consistency with the other Pact implementations)

In theory, you could add matchers to it by modifying that code (https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-ruby)

But, probably, a better option would be to add a new matcher to Pact Go somehow that simply is syntatic sugar that spits out a bunch of regexes under the hood, keeping things compatible

It?s been a while since I?ve had my head in the depths of the code base, but you?d probably want to be looking at https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-go/blob/master/dsl/matcher.go as a starting point

I would absolutely welcome a PR. BUT, I would like to know a bit more about your use case to justify expanding any interface, to see how it could benefit the community going forward

I looked on it and I was pretty much sure that the custom matcher would have to use the built in types in the end just to support cross language integration but wanted double check.

cool

Let me know if you need help

I?ll be honest, the next 2 weeks i?m flat out (2 talks, 2 interstate trips and client work), but will do what I can.

thank you again. will come back here if any further questions on the road

has joined #pact-go

I think this message is displayed when the CLI tools can?t actually be found either. You need to install https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-ruby-standalone beforehand and make sure al the executables are available on your path

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

I have a question about provider states. I understand that when I can't run the API locally, you need to have an endpoint or similar you can call that will insert the test data into my datasource before the interaction is replayed against the provider. Now, for provider states in a local API, how would they work, exactly? Do they still interact with the datastore, only locally? The only examples I've seen have been really simple and general

exactly

The only difference is how the states get setup. You can instrument your running API with extra endpoints (e.g. `/pact/setup`) that will handle the state, or you can pass a function to the Pact runner and that will do a similar thing

People didn?t like having to add extra endpoints to their APIs - they felt they were cheating or potentially modifying the code in such a way that it reduced their confidence in what was actually going to production. For some, appending new endpoints/handlers to the API was problematic also

I see. And the I presume then will happen right before the interaction is actually run, so the `/pact/setup` endpoint is called, the mock data gets injected into the database, the request is replayed and the provider sees that "Oh, TestUser123 does exist" and responds accordingly

Now, this would have to be cleaned up. It doesn't sound like that can happen in the `setup` endpoint, is this the purpose of the `AfterEach` handler?

Pretty much, albeit in most cases you can have a default case in the setup endpoint enough yelled care of initialisation/cleanup

In most cases, a cleanup is not necessary and the new state setup can just set it as needed

> Pretty much, albeit in most cases you can have a default case in the setup endpoint enough yelled care of initialisation/cleanup Apologies was on the phone and obviously this misspelled. What I meant to say was? Pretty much, albeit in most cases you can have a default case in the setup endpoint that takes care of initialization/cleanup

Makes sense! Thanks for explaining

Quick question: where in the `pact-go` source is the consumer side request parsed? I.e. where the mock receives the request and creates the response

In Ruby :wink:

ah..

It uses the ruby mock service that has been packaged so it can be used independently.

I see, thanks

The reason I am asking is: my client creates the request body in a POST request by calling `json.Marshal()` on a struct instance, and calling `bytes.NewReader(body)` before sending it as an input in `http.NewRequest()`.

In the interaction setup I am describing the body with a `MapMatcher`.

The problem I am having is, when executing the test, pact says that the interaction does not match the request, because the request body it gets has doubly escaped quotation marks, while the interaction does not

have you looked at the logs?

I can, of course, just `json.Marshal` the interaction setup as well, but that is the deprecated way of doing it according to the source code

You'll need @matt.fellows to help you with that.

I'm not a go person

Yep, my logs are showing this: ``` Key: - is expected + is actual Matching keys and values are not shown { - "body": { - "proofRequestId": "someId" - } + "body": "{\"proofRequestId\":\"someId\"}" } ```

Thanks Beth! I'll wait for Matt's input

I think your content types may be not matching

the second one is a string

not a json object

it only tries to parse the body to json if the content type contains "json"

oh good catch, I'll give that a *go*

lol, yup, that was it

Thanks @bethskurrie !

np

has joined #pact-go

What is the purpose of this check? https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-go/blob/master/dsl/pact.go#L416 It's causing my `BeforeEach` to be skipped

Hmm I see the issue. I'm assuming you are setting a remote provider states endpoint? The idea is that we need a way to avoid duplication of calling that before each hook. The current rule is to only execute on proxy setup endpoint. We might need to enhance that logic

I am not setting a provider states endpoint, I was just trying to use a `BeforeEach` to run before my test

So the idea is that `BeforeEach` statements are only run if a proxy setup endpoint is set?

No, it should happen only once per interaction. It just so happens to be done when the setup endpoint is called - which should _always_ happen (unless you set a specific remote endpoint for that)

so it sounds like a bug, then

Right, so if I don't set a setup endpoint, pact should still call the `/__setup` endpoint, thus allowing the `BeforeEach` to be run?

has joined #pact-go

@marius.maaland apologies, have been away for a few days. Managed to do this on the plane: https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-go/compare/fix/enable-external-https-requests?expand=1

Would you mind taking a look to see if it?s a sensible implementation?

Basically, allow somebody to specify a TLS configuration for their needs. There is an example in there for a self-signed certificate, but to simply disable verification is also very easy

Yes

Would you mind providing more detail on this bug? It should definitely be called, unless there is a new bug in there

Yep. Let me get back to you tomorrow (pacific time)

great! thanks, I'll take a look as soon as I get the chance

You?re welcome

It?s still not ready from prime time, but I?d rather have real users play with it before I invest too far

Hi @matt.fellows, sorry I've been busy. I'll try to type up an MVP showing the problem asap. But here's a short description: I tried to setup `BeforeEach`, but it wasn't run, because that `if` statement I linked to wasn't entered, since I did not specify any `ProviderStatesSetupURL`

Thanks Marius. It should be the other way around. If you _don?t_ specify that URL, we will do the provider states mapping: https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-go/blob/master/dsl/pact.go#L345

in any case, if you get around to raising an issue that?d be great. Then we can track it appropriately

Hi @matt.fellows, just wanted to let you know that I haven't forgot about this, I've just had to focus on other things. Will get back to this soon

:+1:

Finally got around to checking this out, thanks for your patience @matt.fellows. The PR looks fine, I don't think we're going to use the self-signed certificate functionality because it provides little extra benefit for our testing. Simply disabling the verification works just fine for us

:+1:

Awesome thanks

I agree

Just driving but will get this in to mainline soon

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

Hello. I'm new in pact-go. I'm testing the examaples of the pact-go documentation, but appears always the same error. ```2019/10/09 14:34:26 [DEBUG] starting service 2019/10/09 14:34:26 [ERROR] service exec: "pact-mock-service": executable file not found in $PATH 2019/10/09 14:34:26 [DEBUG] waiting for port 55073 to become available 2019/10/09 14:34:36 [ERROR] Expected server to start < 10s. Timed out waiting for Mock Server to start on port 55073 - are you sure it's running? panic: runtime error: invalid memory address or nil pointer dereference```

Do you know how to fix this?

Did you install the CLI tool? https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-go#installation

yes

Is `pact/bin` in your `$PATH` ? `pact-go` does not seem to find `pact-mock-service` so I suspect it might not be

What happens if you run `pact-provider-verifier --help verify` ?

You were right. I didn't set the pact/bin correctly, but now i did it. Thx!

:+1:

Thanks Marius!

Hello i'm tryng to build a project with pact-go in travis/trusty, but when it starts to run test files this error appears: ```2019/10/11 17:52:57 [ERROR] service: /home/travis/pact/lib/ruby/bin/ruby: line 6: /home/travis/pact/lib/ruby/bin.real/ruby: No such file or directory --- PASS: TestProvider (0.13s)```

Is there something missing in travis.yml or my dockerfile?

I've fixed the previous error.

FYI `v1.0.0-beta.8` has been released with this included

thanks for your help

probably can release `1.0.0` now :slightly_smiling_face:

Nice! Thank you!

:+1:

Looks like I'll be doing some work on a client that used Go soon, and they are very keen for Pact. So I'll iron out any wrinkles I experience when there

Sounds good :slightly_smiling_face:

has joined #pact-go

First cut at a Pact workshop for Go: https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-workshop-go Feedback welcome!

has joined #pact-go

we have a new feature available to Pact Go to remove the pain point of consumers breaking a provider build with new / changed contracts. If you?d like to opt-in to a beta of this, please DM me.

hey. Which is the right way to build a consumer test with a query param?

```// Package main contains a runnable Consumer Pact test example. package main import ( "fmt" "log" "net/http" "strings" "testing" "http://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-go/dsl" ) // Example Pact: How to run me! // 1. cd <pact-go>/examples // 2. go test -v -run TestConsumer func TestConsumer(t *testing.T) { type UserOutput struct { Name string `json:"fullname"` Phone string `json:"cellphone"` Gender string `json:"gender"` Country string `json:"country"` Region string `json:"region"` Commune string `json:"commune"` } // Create Pact connecting to local Daemon pact := &dsl.Pact{ Consumer: "consumer", Provider: "prov", Host: "localhost", } defer pact.Teardown() // Pass in test case var test = func() error { u := fmt.Sprintf("http://localhost:%d/api/v1/user/basics?mail=hola@mail.com", pact.Server.Port) req, err := http.NewRequest("GET", u, strings.NewReader(`{"mail":""}`)) // NOTE: by default, request bodies are expected to be sent with a Content-Type // of application/json. If you don't explicitly set the content-type, you // will get a mismatch during Verification. req.Header.Set("Content-Type", "application/json") if err != nil { return err } if _, err = http://http.DefaultClient.Do(req); err != nil { return err } return err } // Set up our expected interactions. pact. AddInteraction(). Given("A user"). UponReceiving("A request to get user"). WithRequest(dsl.Request{ Method: "GET", Path: dsl.String("user/basics?mail=hola@mail.com"), Headers: dsl.MapMatcher{"Content-Type": dsl.String("application/json")}, Body: map[string]string{ "mail": "", }, }). WillRespondWith(dsl.Response{ Status: 200, Headers: dsl.MapMatcher{"Content-Type": dsl.String("application/json")}, Body: dsl.Match(&UserOutput{}), }) // Verify if err := pact.Verify(test); err != nil { log.Fatalf("Error on Verify: %v", err) } fmt.Println("Test Passed!") } ```

im using this way but it isnt working prioperly

In other languages, the query params are a separate key

Try "Query".

ok, i will try

Hello! Which is the best way to retrieve a specific contract from pact-broker without extra information ?

I'm currently trying to obtain the "response" tag of a retrieved pact-test, from the broker. But it's pretty messy.

What are you trying to achieve?

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

Hi, I'm having an issue with the pact workshop. I dont see a pact file being created in step 3.

Here is the output (after adding -v and fmt.Println(os.Getenv("PACT_DIR")) in the test): ```--- ?Running Consumer Pact tests go test -v -tags=integration -count=1 http://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-workshop-go/consumer/client -run 'TestClientPact' /home/Steffen/code/pact-workshop-go/pacts 2020/03/17 17:05:28 [INFO] INFO WEBrick 1.3.1 2020/03/17 17:05:28 [INFO] INFO ruby 2.2.2 (2015-04-13) [i386-mingw32] 2020/03/17 17:05:28 [INFO] INFO WEBrick::HTTPServer#start: pid=11104 port=62467 === RUN TestClientPact_GetUser === RUN TestClientPact_GetUser/the_user_exists --- PASS: TestClientPact_GetUser (0.06s) --- PASS: TestClientPact_GetUser/the_user_exists (0.06s) PASS ok http://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-workshop-go/consumer/client 4.179s```

Can you please set the log level to `DEBUG` and run again?

It looks like you might be running in a Windows-like environment, but somehow it seems to start the mock service - so that?s a good start!

There should be a log file somewhere also - if you could dig that up and share that would be ace

has joined #pact-go

Yes, this is under cygwin.

```$ make consumer --- ?Running Consumer Pact tests go test -v -tags=integration -count=1 http://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-workshop-go/consumer/client -run 'TestClientPact' Starting test /home/Steffen/code/pact-workshop-go/pacts 2020/03/18 10:13:47 [INFO] INFO WEBrick 1.3.1 2020/03/18 10:13:47 [INFO] INFO ruby 2.2.2 (2015-04-13) [i386-mingw32] 2020/03/18 10:13:47 [INFO] INFO WEBrick::HTTPServer#start: pid=12612 port=51529 === RUN TestClientPact_GetUser === RUN TestClientPact_GetUser/the_user_exists --- PASS: TestClientPact_GetUser (0.06s) --- PASS: TestClientPact_GetUser/the_user_exists (0.06s) PASS 2020/03/18 10:13:47 [DEBUG] pact setup logging 2020/03/18 10:13:47 [DEBUG] pact setup 2020/03/18 10:13:47 [DEBUG] pact write Pact file 2020/03/18 10:13:47 [DEBUG] mock service write pact 2020/03/18 10:13:47 [DEBUG] teardown 2020/03/18 10:13:47 [DEBUG] client: stop server 2020/03/18 10:13:47 [DEBUG] stopping service with pid 11876 ok http://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-workshop-go/consumer/client 4.177s```

I guess the file is written somewhere, but not in the expected place, maybe because its trying to use cygwin path name as a Windows path name?

Anyway, I'll set it up on MacOs

Thanks Steffen - given all of that seems to be working fine, I?m also guessing that the pact files will be written somewhere else too!

Now that I have it working, the output I get when verifying the provider is different from the doc:

```--- ?Running Provider Pact tests go test -count=1 -tags=integration http://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-workshop-go/provider -run "TestPactProvider" 2020/03/20 13:48:06 API starting: port 61622 ([::]:61622) --- FAIL: TestPactProvider (0.90s) pact.go:416: Verifying a pact between GoAdminService and GoUserService Given User sally exists A request to login with user 'sally' with GET /users/10 returns a response which has a matching body user_service_test.go:33: Pact test failed FAIL FAIL http://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-workshop-go/provider 1.129s FAIL make: *** [provider] Error 1```

it doesn?t show the diff

yes I?ve seen this issue recently. I think the latest standalone breaks it because of the wey the output

I?ll try and diagnose it today, and will raise an issue to fix it

sorry about this

I didn't think I made a backwards incompatible change, but let me know if you need something fixed @matt.fellows

It was the change that sent output from stdout to stderr or something like that.

I'll fix it on the go side because I think that's where it belongs. I need to look a bit more carefully though and will let you know what I find

There might have been an unintentional release while we were working out the right format.

@bethskurrie so just got home from swimming and did a quick test (outside of go). Start a web server on a port so you get passed the connection refused erors (e.g. `python -m http.server 8080` (python 3) or `python -m SimpleHTTPServer` (python 2), then point your verifier at any old pact file with the json formatter enabed: ``` ./pact/bin/pact-provider-verifier -f json --provider-base-url http://localhost:8080 ./examples/pacts/consumer-httpbin.json | jq .```

With the JSON formatter, neither in stdout/stderr do you get the formatted diffs. This used to be the case, but seems to have disappeared. Current version of the verifier from latest standalone is `1.30.0` . But I?m pretty sure the regression came in a few releases ago

I think the mismatches has the info I need, but doesn?t pretty-print it

Hm I don't remember changing that.

I'll have a look this afternoon.

Looks like the exception has disappeared.

@matt.fellows 1.82.1

It was a while ago that disappeared. I hadn't realised that go was relying on that part of the json for the mismatches, and I'd removed it because of the noise of the backtrace.

I'll have a look but I'm fairly confident we weren't using a JSON field to print the failure - it was in stderr/stdout somewhere and we just printed it verbatim

Let me confirm, I've just put toddler down for a nap and will jump online in 5

I didn't think it supported doing json to file and stdout as well.

Using git@github.com:pact-foundation/pact-ruby-standalone-e2e-example.git is the easiest way to go back in time.

set the standalone version in script/install.sh

thanks

Online now, will give it a ~go~ Go

OK whatever you did fixed it. I?ll look at the diff shortly

I put the exception back in.

Is that in the JSON document?

yes

Cool. Let me just see what we?re doing to make sure it?s sensible

ok cool yep, we were just printing `example.Exception.Message` - so thanks for adding it back in. I recalled a while back me doing some magic on the strings in `stderr`/`stdout` and hence my initial suspicion. The only magic now is the JSONL formatted parsing of `stdout` that goes on to get the JSON.

thanks for fixing so quickly

np

@steffen.vulpius delete the `./pact` folder in the workshop and try running the step again. It should automatically pull down the latest standalone with a fix for that message. Thanks for raising it!

Cool. I'll reinstall it. I setup pact broker locally and have a python client publishing to a Go service. Can't wait to demo it to my org next week.

Is there a way to make the example content for Errors empty for this struct?? ```type Status struct { Status string `json:"status" pact:"example=OK"` Errors []string `json:"errors"` }``` I am looking for something like this: ```{ "status": "OK, "errors": [] }```

hmm that is an interesting question.

Also, hello there - long time no speak!

Hi, How are you doing?

has joined #pact-go

Sorry, I ended up going to bed - late night. Did I see that you?d moved on from Sainos?

Hey , Pact Gophers - How dow you handle a session based authorization on a API while verifying contracts on the provider Example : there is a session API which is used to create a token and that token is an Authorization for another request API , and that session lasts only for some time

:wave:

I usually replace any tokens with a valid token using request filters https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-go#request-filtering

Step 8-10 cover off this exact scenario. See https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-workshop-go/tree/step10 for the solution to the problem

@matt.fellows@matt.fellows@matt.fellows will I be able to do this for each state say good state where the session is valid and invalid state where the session is invalid some thing like that ?

of course

Typically in the state handlers directly

you can handle that in many ways - state handlers are the main one though

yes

If you have any example can you share the same ?

The example above does this, does it not?

The above example adds it to all requests which is slightly different from our case

So use the state handlers to set a variable that the request filter uses

and then the request filter can act conditionally on the state

Ah got it may be I am understand you let me give a try

I am slightly confused matt here , can we append request filters from the state handlers ?

No, the request filter is a function that has to be declared in advance of running the verification. That function can close over variables however in the outer scope (e.g. a top-level test variable like `var authorization bool` ). You could then use the state handlers to enable/disable authorization by setting the value to what you need

make sense?

the idea is the authorization header value changes based on the endpoint what we test , for one API thee header value is static where as for other API the value is dynamic , the dynamic value is what we want to override in the statehandlers

@matt.fellows ^

Typically the value for the Dynamic API is generated from static API endpoint basically its all session based

here is an example what we trying , we haven?t tested this but ```func (suite *FunctionalTestSuite) TestProvider() { token, err := uuid.NewUUID() if err != nil { suite.FailNow(err.Error()) } suite.authToken = token f := func(next http.Handler) http.Handler { return http.HandlerFunc(func(w http.ResponseWriter, r *http.Request) { if strings.Contains(r.RequestURI, "requests") { r.Header.Add("Authorization", suite.authToken.String()) next.ServeHTTP(w, r) } }) } // Verify the Provider - Tag-based Published Pacts for any known consumers _, err = suite.pact.VerifyProvider(suite.T(), types.VerifyRequest{ ProviderBaseURL: os.Getenv("PACT_BASE_URL"), Tags: []string{"master", "prod"}, FailIfNoPactsFound: true, BrokerURL: os.Getenv("PACT_BROKER_URL"), BrokerUsername: os.Getenv("PACT_BROKER_USERNAME"), BrokerPassword: os.Getenv("PACT_BROKER_PASSWORD"), BrokerToken: os.Getenv("PACT_BROKER_TOKEN"), PublishVerificationResults: true, StateHandlers: suite.getPactStateHandlers(), RequestFilter: f, }) if err != nil { suite.FailNow(err.Error()) } } func (suite *FunctionalTestSuite) getPactStateHandlers() types.StateHandlers { return types.StateHandlers{ "a session exists for requests API ": func() error { _, err := persistSession(exampleSession(), suite.authToken) if err != nil { return err } return nil }, } }```

if you look at the statehandlers here we are trying to persist the token what we are passing in the RequestFilter for Authorization

ok, so what?s the question exactly?

I can?t validate that your code works obviously, but something like that should work

you have all of the tools you need to modify the request based on a state handler.

> Typically the value for the Dynamic API is generated from static API endpoint basically its all session based Do you mean you have to go out to another API to get the session value? You may want to consider mocking that component out

see https://docs.pact.io/provider/handling_auth

Will give a try for sure , the reason I shared the implementation is to check whether is this the recommended way to implement this or is there a better way for this

No probs!

So I don?t fully appreciate the authentication layers going on in the app, but what you?re doing there looks fine to me

How?d you go @bheemreddy181?

It is going good just that the examples were slightly confusing - ruby implementation was quite straight forward compared to Go, same with setup as well

what?s confusing about the examples? Happy to update them

has joined #pact-go

Mainly interms of spinning up the application for running pact tests , major Go Application just serve the HTTP requests user mux router they don?t spin up the app on local host.

we don?t have file structure like this ```go test -count=1 -tags=integration http://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-workshop-go/provider -run "TestPactProvider"``` how do we run tests when the file structure is really flat ? and we all use GO MODS

> Mainly interms of spinning up the application for running pact tests , major Go Application just serve the HTTP requests user mux router they don?t spin up the app on local host. (edited) I would like to add support for that. It shouldn?t actually be very hard, but at the moment, starting it up shouldn?t be terribly difficult

> how do we run tests when the file structure is really flat ? and we all use GO MODS That?s up to you. I can?t answer how you want to structure your tests. It?s very common to use build tags, if you don?t want to use build tags, remove the tags

Even Developers are taking longer time for setting up pact either on provider and consumer the examples help a lot but more documentation should help

The workshop using `go mod`, so that shouldn?t be an issue - have you looked at that?

We?ve found that more documentation doesn?t necessarily help, it would be great to know what challenges they have specifically, and then we can address that

I?d very much suggest they all run the workshop first

It?s very detailed, and covers of 99% of what you normally need to do

Sounds good we are giving our best to understand the tests , the setup is slightly different from Examples to our Applications. I will ask my dev to ask questions here

Does holding a go protobuf registry ( which holds all the schema for multiple services ) as a library for a group of services eliminate Contract Tests ?

The Schema defined in the library is used by multiple services , typically everyone should use the same package and import schema from it and fill the data and emit messages out

See https://pact.canny.io/feature-requests/p/support-grpc and the protobufs feature. Keen for more feedback (but the short answer I think is ?no?)

Is there a way we can read request headers in State Handlers for Go Implementation ? Our use case is more like we want session passed in as header for an API and store that in the DB ( for Authorization ) before verifying the request

Request filter is the only opportunity to read from or modify a request. Can't you create the session header from a state handler, and then inject it using a request filter?

If not, I'd recommend just not including authorization in your tests because it is sounding like you're making it too complicated. It shouldn't be the case

the idea was we want to keep a session sitting in thee contract file and then use that session in the state handlers to persist in the db , as you said it is getting complicated

when you say ?session in the contract files? what do you mean? A long lived session? How long will the session be valid for?

It all sounds like a recipe for confusion and unmaintainable tests, if you ask me

I?d start to question the value of including auth in pact tests if you can?t make it more simple (and also, if your auth need be this complicated in the first place)

presumably, auth is common to all of your services. So in that case, you could fallback to other types of tests (good functional coverage on the provider, and any synthetic/smoke tests for consumers)

FWIW it usually isn?t this hard, so my instincts are telling me something else is wrong - e.g. the code base isn?t modular enough to deal with it etc.

makes sense , i will move away the auth from contract and just handle them directly in state handlers

Another Question @matt.fellows

is this a right matcher for matching on string ? ``` }, "response": { "status": 200, "headers": { "Content-Type": "application/json; charset=utf-8" }, "body": { "request": { "id": "4c8e646e-2e19-4796-81ea-c1ec5f45d156" }, "matchingRules": { "$.body.request.id": { "match": "type" } } } } } ], "metadata": { "pactSpecification": { "version": "2.0.0" } }```

like the response body.request.id needed to be a string and can be anything assume my consumer has written some wrong matchers i feel

Yep, that is a string matcher in this case. Is the request id supposed to be a string or something else?

string only

Error ```Description of differences -------------------------------------- * Expected a Hash (like {"request"=>{"id"=>"4c8e646e-2e19-4796-81ea-c1ec5f45d156"}, "matchingRules"=>{"$.body.request.id"=>{"match"=>"type"}}}) but got a String ("{\"request\":{\"id\":\"e8393004-8b37-11ea-9596-dca90488bbb8\",\"type\":\"access\",\"status\":\"initial\",\"error\":\"\"}}") at $```

Ah i think a header is missing for this

I think you need to set the `content-type` header

i have that actually

What?s the response type from the API?

The matching library is getting a content type that?s not JSON, so it?s interpreting the result as a string

so maybe just check that

ok will check that

Another question when ever we have multiple clients using the same API , does that mean we write multiple TestProvider https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-go/blob/master/examples/provider_test.go#L22 each with its own provider consumer config and its own request filters ?

I mean more like multiple Consumer Combination

No, just one provider test is all that is required, and you fetch all contracts registered for that provider

Haven?t you done this with Ruby already?

has joined #pact-go

For ruby we have done only one combo , but we provide the consumer name as part of the rake JOB

I see that we provider the combo like this while doing the setup ```suite.pact = &dsl.Pact{ Consumer: os.Getenv("CONSUMER_NAME"), Provider: os.Getenv("PROVIDER_NAME"), LogLevel: "INFO", }```

does this mean i do the same for other combinations ?

the consumer is not required on the provider side verification

I?ll update the readme, that?s not very clear I?m sorry

Oh cool thanks

Here is an issue what i am seeing @matt.fellows , for some reason i have to append and header while writing response thats ok i will check with dev why thats happening . but if you look at the below response even with a matcher it is trying to match the exact value ``` { "request": { - "id": "4c8e646e-2e19-4796-81ea-c1ec5f45d156" - }, - "matchingRules": { - "$.body.request.id": { - "match": "type" - } + "id": "87eb23f8-8b44-11ea-9602-dca90488bbb8" } } Description of differences -------------------------------------- * Expected "4c8e646e-2e19-4796-81ea-c1ec5f45d156" but got "87eb23f8-8b44-11ea-9602-dca90488bbb8" at $.request.id * Could not find key "matchingRules" (keys present are: request) at $```

hangon, how did the matching rules get added to the `body`? Are you hand coding the pact?

nope thats not the body let me share the pact file

```{ "consumer": { "name": "consumer" }, "provider": { "name": "provider" }, "interactions": [ { "description": "a request for request creation", "providerState": "a session exists for requests API", "request": { "method": "post", "path": "/public-api/requests", "headers": { "Content-Type": "application/json", "Accept": "application/json", "Authorization": "4c8e646e-2e19-479s6-81ea-c1ec5f45d156" }, "body": { "request_type": "access" } }, "response": { "status": 200, "headers": { "Content-Type": "application/json; charset=utf-8" }, "body": { "request": { "id": "4c8e646e-2e19-4796-81ea-c1ec5f45d156" }, "matchingRules": { "$.body.request.id": { "match": "type" } } } } } ], "metadata": { "pactSpecification": { "version": "2.0.0" } } }```

the error message above is 100% looking for a field called `matchingRules` in the body.

it?s also a child of `body` in the message you just pasted

It seems to me somebody has manually modified that Pact file, or is using a broken pact consnumer code

Oh ok which is weird let me generate a new PACT file then and test with that

I?m in meetins for the next few hours - good luck!

thanks for helping

i assume there is an issue with `pact-support gem 1.14.3` where it is not able to read the pact file with a matcher from pact broker ```2020/05/01 07:37:56 [DEBUG] executing after hook 2020/05/01 07:37:56 [DEBUG] teardown --- FAIL: TestFunctionalTestSuite (3.40s) --- FAIL: TestFunctionalTestSuite/TestProvider (3.39s) contract_test.go:59: Error Trace: contract_test.go:59 Error: Expected nil, but got: &errors.errorString{s:"error verifying provider: exit status 1\n\nSTDERR:\nINFO: Fetching pacts for provider_name from http://pact-broker-poc.dev.com for tags: latest master\nINFO: Reading pact at http://pact-broker-poc.dev.com/pacts/provider/provider_name/consumer/consumer_name/version/1.0.0\nError reading file from \nNo such file or directory @ rb_sysopen - /Users/bvennapureddy/pact/lib/vendor/ruby/2.2.0/gems/pact-support-1.14.3/lib/pact/consumer_contract/pact_file.rb:51:in `read'\n/Users/bvennapureddy/pact/lib/vendor/ruby/2.2.0/gems/pact-support-1.14.3/lib/pact/consumer_contract/pact_file.rb:51:in `get_local'\n/Users/bvennapureddy/pact/lib/vendor/ruby/2.2.0/gems/pact-support-1.14.3/lib/pact/consumer_contract/pact_file.rb:41:in `render_pact'\n/Users/bvennapureddy/pact/lib/vendor/ruby/2.2.0/gems/pact-support-1.14.3/lib/pact/consumer_contract/pact_file.rb:22:in `read'\n/Users/bvenn``` the same pact file works when i reference it from my local using PACT_URL?s , correct me if i am wrong

i am using CURL command to push contracts to broker manually which is something like this ```curl -v -XPUT \-H "Content-Type: application/json" -d@consumer_name-provider_name.json http://pact-broker-poc.dev.com/pacts/provider/provider_name/consumer/consumer_name/version/1.0.0```

below is how my provider setup looks like ```// Verify the Provider - Tag-based Published Pacts for any known consumers _, err := suite.pact.VerifyProvider(suite.T(), types.VerifyRequest{ AfterEach: func() error { suite.pact.Teardown() return nil }, ProviderBaseURL: fmt.Sprintf("http://127.0.0.1:%d", port), PactURLs: []string{os.Getenv("PACT_URL")}, Tags: []string{"master"}, FailIfNoPactsFound: true, BrokerURL: fmt.Sprintf(os.Getenv("PACT_BROKER_URL")), PublishVerificationResults: canIPublishResultsToBroker(suite), ProviderVersion: os.Getenv("TRAVIS_PULL_REQUEST_SHA"), StateHandlers: suite.getPactStateHandlers(), RequestFilter: updateIncomingRequestHeaders, })```

You need to configure the test to use the broker properties, not pact URLs

See examples in repo

without matcher in the pact file this works fine for some reason

will check that

That doesn't sound right to me

Actually i am using both

the reason you see PACT_URL above is my consumer triggered provider CI build will pass a PACT_URL where as provider PR verification will directly pull master contract from pact broker

using broker properties like the BROKER_URL

the setup is done this way because we want to use the same configuration for both ( Consumer initiated CI build vs PROVIDER initiated CI build )

if there is PACT_URL pull that pact file else pull the master PACT from the broker for all consumers

if i use the pact file from local ( bare metal ) reference this setup works fine , i see a problem only when i am pulling this pact file from the broker

Seems highly unlikely, but if you can prove that that needs to be fixed!

either the error logging is not correct i feel , hard to debug whats wrong here , i tried a pact file from broker without a matcher i see the below logs ```2020/05/01 08:15:50 [DEBUG] teardown --- FAIL: TestFunctionalTestSuite (3.06s) --- FAIL: TestFunctionalTestSuite/TestProvider (2.96s) --- FAIL: TestFunctionalTestSuite/TestProvider/has_a_matching_body (0.00s) pact.go:622: Verifying a pact between consumer_name and provider_name Given a session exists for requests API request to create a request with POST /public-api/requests returns a response which has a matching body pact.go:628: Verifying a pact between consumer_name and provider_name Given a session exists for requests API request to create a request with POST /public-api/requests returns a response which has a matching body Actual: {"request":{"id":"e0e0b432-8bad-11ea-b94f-dca90488bbb8","type":"access","status":"initial","error":""}} Diff -------------------------------------- Key: - is expected + is actual Matching keys and values are not shown { "request": { - "id": "4c8e646e-2e19-4796-81ea-c1ec5f45d156" + "id": "e0e0b432-8bad-11ea-b94f-dca90488bbb8" } } Description of differences -------------------------------------- * Expected "4c8e646e-2e19-4796-81ea-c1ec5f45d156" but got "e0e0b432-8bad-11ea-b94f-dca90488bbb8" at $.request.id contract_test.go:60: Error Trace: contract_test.go:60 Error: Expected nil, but got: &errors.errorString{s:"error verifying provider: exit status 1\n\nSTDERR:\nINFO: Fetching pacts for datacompliance from http://pact-broker-poc.dev.com for tags: latest master\nINFO: Reading pact at http://pact-broker-poc.dev.com/pacts/provider/provider_name/consumer/consumer_name/version/1.0.0\nError reading file from \nNo such file or directory @ rb_sysopen - /Users/bvennapureddy/pact/lib/vendor/ruby/2.2.0/gems/pact-support-1.14.3/lib/pact/consumer_contract/pact_file.rb:51:in `read'\n/Users/bvennapureddy/pact/lib/vendor/ruby/2.2.0/gems/pact-support-1.14.3/lib/pact/consumer_contr```

which also has ```Reading pact at http://pact-broker-poc.dev.com/pacts/provider/provider_name/consumer/consumer_name/version/1.0.0\nError reading file from \nNo such file or directory @ rb_sysopen - /Users/bvennapureddy/pact/lib/vendor/ruby/2.2.0/gems/pact-support-```

Can you please set log level to debug and share that? I suspect a configuration issue

It is confusing tho getting a response and that error

Can i DM you the logs or paste it here ?

What happens if you comment out pact_urls ?

I think you're passing in an empty string

Hence why it's says can't read file <blank>

(sorry I'm on a mobile)

giving a try

Ah that worked , is there a way we can support this ?

What do you mean?

Don't supply an empty string in that value

I.e. Ensure PACT_URLS slice is empty

Have to run but sounds like you're back on track

Can we improve the logging when there are errors ?

has joined #pact-go

I was able to successfully do a pact provider setup for one of our GO applications thanks a ton Matt for the help

while publishing the results from the CI , i don?t see the provider tags are being set correctly , we are passing in the branch names as a reference , but the broker UI doesn?t show up anything

this is how verify provider looks like ```// Verify the Provider - Tag-based Published Pacts for any known consumers _, err := suite.pact.VerifyProvider(suite.T(), types.VerifyRequest{ AfterEach: func() error { suite.pact.Teardown() return nil }, ProviderBaseURL: fmt.Sprintf("http://127.0.0.1:%d", port), // Consumer initiated CI build will have PACT URL with a specific pact PactURLs: setPACTURL(), Tags: []string{"master"}, FailIfNoPactsFound: true, BrokerURL: fmt.Sprintf(os.Getenv("PACT_BROKER_URL")), PublishVerificationResults: canIPublishResultsToBroker(), ProviderVersion: getProviderVersion(), StateHandlers: suite.getPactStateHandlers(), RequestFilter: updateIncomingRequestHeaders, ProviderTags: []string{os.Getenv("BRANCH")}, })``` i could see there is BRANCH variable on my CI as well

do we need to pass an param here https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-go/blob/1238fba0f539afc1c271ad5a3fa6d32fa41caa07/client/verification_service.go#L25 ?

The docs there could probably be updated, but that file is for internal use only anyway

The flag is passed in `types/verify_request.go`

In `debug` log level, you should see the arguments passed to the standalone CLI. If `--provider-version-tag` is not being said, there may be an issue (or latest standalone tools not installed)

i don?t see that in the debug log level ``` starting verification service with args: [--format json --provider-base-url http://localhost:63819 --provider-states-setup-url http://localhost:63819/__setup --pact-broker-base-url http://pact-broker-poc.dev.com --provider_app_version 1.0.0 --provider providername --consumer-version-tag master]```

Do you know which standalone had this issue and in which version it was fixed

ok so something else is amisse

can you please print out `os.Getev("BRANCH")`

it doesn?t look to be an issue with the standalone, it looks like an issue with pact go

yes i did the value exists

:thought_balloon:

I even tried with a hardcoded value i see the same issue

which version of pact go?

```v1.3.0```

ta

I?ve found the issue - just pushed up a change now. Can you pull latest (not tagged) to see if that works?

i just saw a new commit , Sure will check that

Perfecto that worked :slightly_smiling_face:

why is verbose variable deprecated

It?s a long answer, but basically because it?s incompatible with the way the current Go package works

It?s been deprecated for at least a year I think

released `1.4.0`

thanks :slightly_smiling_face:

no probs! Thanks for picking up the issue

How do we do a no_op in state handlers in go similar to ruby ? https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-ruby/wiki/Provider-states#provider-codebase

I've notice that `GraphQLInteraction` is implemented for `pact-js`, but not `pact-go`. No one has submitted an enhancement request so far, is there a roadmap to bring this feature into `pact-go` ? I can submit the request if not planned yet, thanks!

Just pass in a function that doesn't return an error

PR/feature request welcome!

Is there any documentation about Work in progress pacts , i couldn?t find it

It's documented on the readme

Sorry i missed that

Quick Question Team , understanding pending pacts https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-go/blob/master/README.md#pending-pacts what does this mean ? ```It does so by flagging the contract as "unverified" in the Pact Broker the first time a contract is published``` Do we need to manually unverify the pact using an API ?

> It does so by flagging the contract as ?unverified? in the Pact Broker *the first time a contract is published* does that answer your question?

I?ve bolded the part that should answer it :wink:

(short answer is no)

you mean tagging the contract as `unverified` rather than tagging it as `master` ? i am slightly confused

you don?t do anything, when the pact is published the broker automatically detects that the contract has or hasn?t been seen before and internally marks it as ?pending? or not

when provider verificaction happens, if the verification passes it transitions out of pending and is now a real contract that will break builds (see the original article that talks about the caveats around tagging etc.)

if the verification fails, the `can-i-deploy` check for the consumer will fail, because the provider has not yet verified it

Ah ok , that depends on if provider enabled `EnablePending: true` which will automatically set the verifications results to true even though the contract is failed / not verified - we are not using `can-i-deploy` actually

thanks for the explanation

> verifications results to true No, the verification results are still sent back to the broker that the verification failed, and the reasons why (so in Pactflow you can see why the verification failed, which fields were impacted etc.). It just returns a local exit status of `0`

So if you?re not using `can-i-deploy` you?ll need a way to check if the consumer is compatible with the provider - otherwise you might release something the provider does not yet support

We are using http://blog.pact.io/2018/07/16/publishing-pact-verification-statuses-to-github/ feature actually which will replace `can-i-deploy`

```if the verification fails, the can-i-deploy check for the consumer will fail, because the provider has not yet verified it``` this more looks like feature branch based implementation

why?

we don?t want the consumer build to be blocked until the provider actually implements the feature

sure, so how do you have a feature in master that is going to production that relies on an API that doesn?t yet exist?

Steps we are following now is 1. Consumer pushes contracts first to branch and then pushes them to master ( Typically only writes tests first ) feature is switched off 2. Provider implements the feature by looking at the contracts ( Test Driven Development ) may be 3. Once Provider successfully implements the feature thats when we will ask the Consumer to Switch on the feature and we will enable the Git Status Checks

I assume here for time being if we don?t enable Git Status Checks that should fill this use case , but correct me if i am wrong

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

I don?t see this happening i still see the jobs exits with a status `1` this is how my provider setup looks like ```// Verify the Provider - Tag-based Published Pacts for any known consumers _, err := suite.pact.VerifyProvider(suite.T(), types.VerifyRequest{ AfterEach: func() error { suite.pact.Teardown() return nil }, ProviderBaseURL: fmt.Sprintf("http://127.0.0.1:%d", port), // Consumer initiated CI build will have PACT URL with a specific pact //PactURLs: setPACTURL(), PactURLs: []string{"pact.json"}, //Tags: []string{"master"}, FailIfNoPactsFound: true, //BrokerURL: fmt.Sprintf(os.Getenv("PACT_BROKER_URL")), PublishVerificationResults: canIPublishResultsToBroker(), StateHandlers: suite.getPactStateHandlers(), RequestFilter: updateIncomingRequestHeaders, // https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-go/blob/master/README.md#pending-pacts // even if we get new contracts which is not implemented in case as we are doing parallel development. This flag will mark Provider CI Green EnablePending: true, // These below two are used to tag the provider version and the reference branch for each verification ProviderVersion: getProviderVersion(), ProviderTags: setProviderTags(), })```

Another thing i spotted here is if i have local pact which i am referring to , with `BrokerURL`it doesn?t pick the local pact rather refers to the broker

Doesn?t pactUrl array takes the precedence over the brokerURL ?

I don?t think this works as expected more details in the thread

So two things. You currently need to be using Pactflow for pending pacts (we often test out new features this way). It was mentioned previously but not clear in the readme. I'll update that

The second part I'm not sure off the top of my head the precedence rules. I would just set the right properties dynamically rather than specifying both

Another quick question , go test suite only tells that there are only two things getting validated when ever i run my test 1. has a matching body 2. validating the headers Does this mean it is not validating the status code( like whether its 200 or not ) of the response , Can we output the logs when the validation is successful which we don?t do right now

hmm that doesn?t look right to me

I?ll check the example output in the project, it should definitely show all assertions, including status codes

when you pactflow does that mean we should use broker instance of pact flow ?

Correct, if you?re self hosting a broker it won?t yet work

hmmm :disappointed: is there any other way we can achieve this with self hosted broker ? this will not work even with a local pact ?

local pact?

Not yet I?m afraid. Let me find the public issue/feature request

@bheemreddy181 https://pact.canny.io/feature-requests/p/pending-pacts-prevent-consumers-being-able-to-break-provider-builds-with-changed. Apologies it wasn?t clear earlier. People seemed to know about the pending/WIP pacts but from other sources so assumed everyone knew we were rolling it out slowly

Thanks for supporting and maintaining the open source version. By when in general I can expect this feature I assumed so it is available and we planned things accordingly but ya have to change those now

Thanks Bheem

I?m not sure I understand the question. Is there a few parts - when will it be generally available? I can?t answer that yet, but once we have fully support across languages and we?ve ironed out any basic kinks, we?ll roll it into the OSS broker for broad consumption

This might be a month or so, but can?t say for sure. We roll things out to Pactflow first, because we can see logs, diagnose issues faster etc.

Makes sense you answered it :)

All that being said - please feel free to comment on the issue above. Feedback is helpful

welcome to signup to a free dev account and put test data in their if you?d like to prove out the workflow ahead of time

@bheemreddy181 you can enable wip/pending

using `PACT_BROKER_FEATURES=pacts_for_verification` env var

Ah with the current version of pact_go ?

yep, should work

oh cool will give a try

Do we still need `enable_pending` ?

yes

Do i need to pass that variable to args here ? https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-go/blob/master/types/verify_request.go#L114

i mean the `PACT_BROKER_FEATURES` variable

I tried passing that as a variable to my test command like this `PACT_BROKER_FEATURES=pacts_for_verification go test -tags=contract`

that still didn?t help

i am not sure if this is the correct way though

What version of the broker are you using?

Oh, it needs to be set _on the pact broker instance_

i.e. the pact broker process itself must have that environment variable set

Ah got it will do that thanks :)

this thing still didn?t work , i still see exit status `1` is there a way i can debug this

And also i observed that tests run more than once when they fail is there a retry functionality in built for this by default if so any peculiar reason why it was built that way ?

There is no retry built into pact go

Can you please show me what you mean

Ah weird i see the failed logs twice which i assumed tests are running twice

Ya here are the logs

```2020/05/12 22:53:50 [DEBUG] pact setup logging 2020/05/12 22:53:50 [DEBUG] pact setup 2020/05/12 22:53:50 [DEBUG] checking CLI compatability 2020/05/12 22:53:50 [INFO] checking pact-mock-service within range >= 3.5.0, < 4.0.0 2020/05/12 22:53:50 [DEBUG] running binary pact-mock-service 2020/05/12 22:53:50 API starting: port 61027 ([::]:61027) 2020/05/12 22:53:51 [DEBUG] checking version for binary pact-mock-service version 3.6.1 2020/05/12 22:53:51 [DEBUG] checking if version 3.6.1 within semver range >= 3.5.0, < 4.0.0 2020/05/12 22:53:51 [DEBUG] 3.6.1 satisfies constraints 3.6.1 >= 3.5.0, < 4.0.0 2020/05/12 22:53:51 [INFO] checking pact-provider-verifier within range >= 1.30.0, < 2.0.0 2020/05/12 22:53:51 [DEBUG] running binary pact-provider-verifier 2020/05/12 22:53:52 [DEBUG] checking version for binary pact-provider-verifier version 1.30.1 2020/05/12 22:53:52 [DEBUG] checking if version 1.30.1 within semver range >= 1.30.0, < 2.0.0 2020/05/12 22:53:52 [DEBUG] 1.30.1 satisfies constraints 1.30.1 >= 1.30.0, < 2.0.0 2020/05/12 22:53:52 [INFO] checking pact-broker within range >= 1.22.3 2020/05/12 22:53:52 [DEBUG] running binary pact-broker 2020/05/12 22:53:52 [DEBUG] checking version for binary pact-broker version 1.26.0 2020/05/12 22:53:52 [DEBUG] checking if version 1.26.0 within semver range >= 1.22.3 2020/05/12 22:53:52 [DEBUG] 1.26.0 satisfies constraints 1.26.0 >= 1.22.3 2020/05/12 22:53:52 [DEBUG] setting up a service manager 2020/05/12 22:53:52 [DEBUG] setting up a service manager 2020/05/12 22:53:52 [DEBUG] starting service removal monitor 2020/05/12 22:53:52 [DEBUG] starting service creation monitor 2020/05/12 22:53:52 [DEBUG] setting up a service manager 2020/05/12 22:53:52 [DEBUG] starting service creation monitor 2020/05/12 22:53:52 [DEBUG] starting service removal monitor 2020/05/12 22:53:52 [DEBUG] setting up a service manager 2020/05/12 22:53:52 [DEBUG] starting service creation monitor 2020/05/12 22:53:52 [DEBUG] starting service removal monitor 2020/05/12 22:53:52 [DEBUG] starting service creation monitor 2020/05/12 22:53:52 [DEBUG] starting service removal monitor 2020/05/12 22:53:52 [DEBUG] starting new proxy with opts {http 127.0.0.1:61027 0 [0x4715270 0x4715790 0x47831c0] /__setup <nil>} 2020/05/12 22:53:52 [DEBUG] starting reverse proxy on port 61041 2020/05/12 22:53:52 [DEBUG] waiting for port 61041 to become available 2020/05/12 22:53:52 [DEBUG] pact provider verification 2020/05/12 22:53:52 [DEBUG] client: verifying a provider 2020/05/12 22:53:52 [DEBUG] waiting for port 61041 to become available 2020/05/12 22:53:52 [DEBUG] starting verification service with args: [/Users/bvennapureddy/8b/apps/portfolio/spec/pacts/brazil_portal-datacompliance.json --format json --provider-base-url http://localhost:61041 --provider-states-setup-url http://localhost:61041/__setup --pact-broker-base-url http://pact-broker-poc.dev.com --provider_app_version 1.0.0 --provider data --enable-pending] 2020/05/12 22:53:53 [WARN] state handler not found for state: creating a session 2020/05/12 22:53:53 [DEBUG] skipping state handler for request /sessions 2020/05/12 22:53:53 [DEBUG] http reverse proxy received connection from [::1]:61048 on path /sessions 2020/05/12 22:53:53 [DEBUG] setting proxy to target 2020/05/12 22:53:53 [DEBUG] incoming request /sessions 2020/05/12 22:53:53 [DEBUG] outgoing request http://127.0.0.1:61027/sessions (/Users/bvennapureddy/datacompliance/session_handler.go:89) [2020-05-12 22:53:53] pq: value too long for type character varying(2) (/Users/bvennapureddy/datacompliance/session_handler.go:89) [2020-05-12 22:53:53] pq: value too long for type character varying(2) 2020/05/12 22:53:53 [DEBUG] executing after hook 2020/05/12 22:53:53 [DEBUG] teardown 2020/05/12 22:53:53 [DEBUG] skipping state handler for request /public-api/requests 2020/05/12 22:53:53 [DEBUG] http reverse proxy received connection from [::1]:61053 on path /public-api/requests 2020/05/12 22:53:53 [DEBUG] setting proxy to target 2020/05/12 22:53:53 [DEBUG] incoming request /public-api/requests 2020/05/12 22:53:53 [DEBUG] outgoing request http://127.0.0.1:61027/public-api/requests 2020/05/12 22:53:53 [DEBUG] executing after hook 2020/05/12 22:53:53 [DEBUG] teardown 2020/05/12 22:53:53 [WARN] state handler not found for state: creating a session 2020/05/12 22:53:53 [DEBUG] skipping state handler for request /sessions 2020/05/12 22:53:53 [DEBUG] http reverse proxy received connection from [::1]:61056 on path /sessions 2020/05/12 22:53:53 [DEBUG] setting proxy to target 2020/05/12 22:53:53 [DEBUG] incoming request /sessions 2020/05/12 22:53:53 [DEBUG] outgoing request http://127.0.0.1:61027/sessions (/Users/bvennapureddy/datacompliance/session_handler.go:89) [2020-05-12 22:53:53] pq: value too long for type character varying(2) (/Users/bvennapureddy/datacompliance/session_handler.go:89) [2020-05-12 22:53:53] pq: value too long for type character varying(2) 2020/05/12 22:53:53 [DEBUG] executing after hook 2020/05/12 22:53:53 [DEBUG] teardown 2020/05/12 22:53:53 [DEBUG] skipping state handler for request /public-api/requests 2020/05/12 22:53:53 [DEBUG] http reverse proxy received connection from [::1]:61059 on path /public-api/requests 2020/05/12 22:53:53 [DEBUG] setting proxy to target 2020/05/12 22:53:53 [DEBUG] incoming request /public-api/requests 2020/05/12 22:53:53 [DEBUG] outgoing request http://127.0.0.1:61027/public-api/requests 2020/05/12 22:53:53 [DEBUG] executing after hook 2020/05/12 22:53:53 [DEBUG] teardown```

What makes you think it's repeating?

Print verbose pact output from go. It will tell you if the server is able to support the pending pacts feature

Also, I think the server (broker) will print a notice but can't verify. I'll check when back at my desk later

Are you running the latest server version?

I think so , I can check that will let you know tomorrow

Will i see the request twice out there I had more logs which also prints ther errors twice and there is a dB check which is failing for one request and that?s printed twice too all this routed me there

Can you share the pact file?

Or the test

I'm wondering if it's because you've provided a broker option and a local option if it's reading both. The output should show this in the tests results, can you please share the full log output including test results?

It should say which pacts it's reading and from where

Sure Matt I will check that

this is working as expected , once i pulled that latest broker. thanks

Just a general note Bheem - new features generally require newer versions of software :wink:

yes true , i agree :slightly_smiling_face:

is there a way we can emit failure logs with pending flag ?

it was reading from broker alone and for only failures they are running twice not sure how else i can explain this

Usecase : for people running these tests on the bare metal or even for the tests running on CI , rather than visiting the broker it would be great if we can emit the logs for understanding what is not implemented or what is failing for which API

The output should contain these failures already one way or another, you could use those

One more observation from my testing , when ever the broker is not reachable verification job emits logs saying `pact.go:413: No pacts found to verifify. Check the tags provided (master) for your broker` which seems little odd for investigation - rather can we emit logs saying `connection refused or couldn't connect`

i didn?t really get you

Thanks Bheem that's not ideal. You can't fail on no pacts found but a dead broker should error

I'll make a reminder to follow this up Monday

@matt.fellows I haven't forgotten about this item, I'll plan to get to this sometime this week, thanks!

Yepp, that's my account

Thanks!

has joined #pact-go

Hey @matt.fellows I was going through the workshop for pact-go and I am unable to run any commands via the `make` command like `make unit` and `make consumer`. I keep getting the following error. ```make: "/bin/bash": Command not found make: *** [Makefile:4: install] Error 127``` This might be a very trivial question. Sorry for my ignorance but I wasn't able to find anything in the internet. I installed build-essentials as I am running the latest Ubuntu. I am not sure what is going wrong.

Is bash installed?

Yes it is

If I run the go commands defined in the Makefile manually, the commands run but some comands exit with a panic state.

Are you using docker? If you could pop an issue against the repo with your docker image that's enough for me to find/fix. It's only been tested on a Mac, so it's possible it doesn't work on Linux. I might add a Travis build for each step

Also, can you try please removing the `SHELL` variable in the `http://config.mk` file

```# SHELL = "/bin/bash"``` It actually should work without that, and it may cause issues

I am not using docker. I will go through the workshop and pop an issue when I find it!

Yep that was the problem! Thanks Matt!!

has joined #pact-go

Would you mind raising an issue? I'll fix it

Okay will do!

has joined #pact-go

Hi All, are there any examples of message-driven pacts tests in GO?

Hey, there's an example in the pact-go repo with some good supporting docs, though I haven't tried it myself yet! https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-go/tree/master/examples/messages

thanks, I'll checkout

Hi! Just wondering why the go implementation relies on the ruby-standalone version of pact? I would much rather see a pure golang module for this. The reason I think like this is that a lot of CI/CD implementations would require the user to install and properly config both ruby and go before being able to build and run the test suite. An alternative would be to compile the ruby-standalone into a shared object library and use that. Instead of relying on having ruby installed correctly on the machines.

has joined #pact-go

You don't need Ruby installed on the machine

Or are you just referring to the standalone?

Either way you have to download a dependency.

I'm also working on integrating to a that shared binary which is the long term objective

So just in case it's not clear. Any CI runtime does not require Ruby to run Pact (albeit a pure implementation would be ideal). We need to publish updated info on our strategy, but pact is very very complex now and having 12 languages implement all of the features and capabilities is a tall ask. So we've moved to a shared engine to do it. Ruby was the old, rust is the new

probably i missed followup on this i didn?t really understand what you mean?t by ```The output should contain these failures already one way or another, you could use those``` you mean as they already show up on pact broker we should look at broker rather than the CI itself

I mean the output of `go test ?` type thing. Any failures will be in there

Hello, I am struggling to pull down and verify pacts from my self-hosted broker. I followed the examples on https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-go and the following works when I use a local broker running on my machine: ```pact.VerifyProvider(t, types.VerifyRequest{ BrokerURL: "http://localhost:9292", ProviderVersion: "1.0.0", ProviderBaseURL: "https://provider-base-url", RequestFilter: fixBearerToken, })``` Setting "PublishVerificationResults: true" works as well using the local broker. But it fails if I use the self-hosted broker: ```pact.VerifyProvider(t, types.VerifyRequest{ BrokerURL: "https://self-hosted-broker-url", ProviderVersion: "1.0.0", ProviderBaseURL: "https://provider-base-url", RequestFilter: fixBearerToken })``` Using the self-hosted broker I just get an error saying "No pacts found to verify", although the same pact has been published to both brokers. Not sure where to go from here. I cannot find any relevant logs for the self-hosted broker. Any help would be appreciated :slightly_smiling_face:

Is the self hosted broker using a self signed certificate?

To connect to a Pact Broker that uses custom SSL cerificates, set the environment variable $SSL_CERT_FILE or $SSL_CERT_DIR to a path that contains the appropriate certificate

The self hosted broker is using a certificate signed by Entrust. It is running in GKE and nginx though, so I'm starting to wonder if adding these headers mentioned here would help - at least I'll give it a try: https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact_broker/wiki/Configuration#running-the-broker-behind-a-reverse-proxy

Golang aside, can you login to the broker and poke around?

Yes, I can view the pacticipants/pacts/matrix etc, but the API browser does not work properly. None of the endpoints are displayed there. Not sure how relevant it is, but I see this error in the console in Chrome when I open the API browser: ```Uncaught TypeError: HAL.normalizeUrl is not a function at eval (eval at _.template (underscore.js:1157), <anonymous>:58:13) at Function._.each._.forEach (underscore.js:87) at child.eval (eval at _.template (underscore.js:1157), <anonymous>:6:4) at child.template (underscore.js:1165) at child.render (links.js:52) at child.render (resource.js:28) at Object.<anonymous> (resource.js:8) at triggerEvents (backbone.js:96) at Object.trigger (backbone.js:181) at Object.success (client.js:13)```

interesting

that seems like JS isn?t being loaded properly, which indicates a configuration issue

if you were to curl the `/` endpoint on your broker, sharing the hostname you hit and the results that might help (DM me if you like)

So one of our contracts only looks for a 200 status and doesn?t care about the response but in cases where we get a 400 response doesn?t user needs to know why there is a 400 what is missing ? pact tests only tell you expected 200 and you got a 400 thats all

It's an interesting point, there may be more detail on your app logs, but having more context would be helpful

Yes looking for more context for such cases

Usually with a failed test, you would print out context of the API responses anyway. Do you not log what your API is doing in those cases?

i assume we do i am still looking into this why we are not seeing logs from applications side.

Question : Is there a way we can re-use statehandlers between two different states in PACT go ?

Of course, a state handler is just a function

@bheemreddy181 FYI if you set log level to `TRACE` you will get full request/response logging.

That should help you diagnose why you are getting `400` when you expect `200`

example here doesn't work .https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-go/tree/master/examples/messages. I get following error ``` FAIL: TestExampleMessageConsumer_UserExists (5.45s) pact.go:762: VerifyMessageConsumer failed: error creating message: exit status 255 STDERR: 'controller' is not recognized as an internal or external command, operable program or batch file.```

Are you on windows?

It is run as part of our ci so it at least works there

My question was more like clubbing two states like below ```"User jmarie exists","User jmarie is unauthenticated": func() error { userRepository = jmarieExists return nil },```

like a comma separated ones

yes, I am on windows.

whats different on windows? and how shall I get it work on windows?

this does but it doesn?t show if any error json response is returned

Thanks for clarifying

there shouldn?t be, it should ?just work? but looks like there might be an issue

I?ll take a look today

```state1 := func() error { ... } "User jmarie exists": state1, "User jmarie is unauthenticated": state1,```

I?d just do that

so short answer is no

format of my message is ```{ "foo":{ "bar":"baz", } "name": "test", }``` its not the map[string]interface{} format, like in example. how can I use this?

I'm unsure of your problem, sorry. It is of type map[string] interface {}

Can you share your test that you're trying to get it into?

If there is a type for that you can use tags on the fields (see docs)

Thanks @matt.fellows, I realised my mistake. It had to do with adding map[string]interface{} for inner object too. something like ```WithContent(map[string]interface{}{ "id": like(127), "name": "Baz", "address": map[string]interface{}{ "city": "pune", "zip": "411045", }, }). AsType(&User{})```

When pact.json file is not provider-test still return "ok". How can we make sure weather tests were "ok" or its returning "ok" because pact file is not found?

has joined #pact-go

Hey all, its been a really long time since we gave our pact some TLC. We are version 0.0.12 and looking to upgrade to latest and great. Happy to shed the ruby daemon too! I thought I saw an upgrade doc somewhere but can't seem to find it. Does anyone have a link?

Hey - welcome back!

There is no guide, but the API should be pretty similar to before. There is at least one deprecated field (`Verbose`) but I don?t think we removed any stable APIs

The big difference is that you now need to install the CLI tools manually, and then you can do the usual `go get` , using mod etc.

Ok cool. We have a crazy docker compose set up that has ruby and the deamon in it. Super excited to slim down that container

The one thing I get is "Port" is not there any more bu twill dig in and see if i can actually do anything other than speculate :slightly_smiling_face:

Lots of breaking changes. All the matcher requests now take custom dsl types instead of just string and map (for headers)

not huge deal just a lot of small changes that are hard to sed

Hmm i seem to be confused. I thought the big change for version 0.0.12 to 1.0.0 is that we no longer rely on ruby.

The installation instructions are unclear. It says : > See below for how to automate this: Is that onlyk referring to the step3 ? on installation? Do we still need the cli tools separately?

WOw i just found the autogeneration. That is _awesome_ and I want to use it. IS there a way though to isolate it per request? For example, the DTO's fields may change per request (i.e. we expect a slice of size 0 in one request and size >= 1 in another)

Is something like that possible? We have massive payloads and the old version (0.0.12) was string based and new version iss struct based (i.e. sprintf("%", dsl.EachLike)) and converting our iant json payloads to `map[string]interface` doesnt seem appealing to me. so would love a way to auto gen as much as possible

BTW :point_up: is super dope and saved me a ton of time

Ths is my only concern now but honestly all of our returns are objects, i'm happy to make "dummy" ones with proper values on sizes per request

I answered this myself. Yes! I got it all working in a `strech-slim` docker container

Thanks for all of this feedback Zach. I'll make a reminder to read thru all of it and address it. Thanks so much!

Ruby will be removed in next major version. The big change here was removing the daemon because people hated it. It still needs the standalone

But in case it's not clear. You didn't, and still don't, need to install Ruby to run Pact. We always bundled a runtime

Obviously those doc's aren't clear enough. I'll fix that thx

It's a good idea. Any thoughts on how to do so nicely? I don't want the tags to he overly complicated. They are ultimately probably going to link to a provider state so that could be an approach

Perhaps point to externalised data sources? E.g. a YAML/JSON file with all of the states and data variants?

Sorry which part are you referring to?

> They are ultimately probably going to link to a provider state so that could be an approach Not a bad idea. I think i can minimize the number of objects will report back

The auto generation part. Haven't fully proofed it out but its _really_ nice.

Sorry for the word vommit. The lib is in an awesome place btw the new features are _really_ nice

oh yeah, we can thank one of the Alex?s for that contribution

thanks, that?s awesome to hear!

I won?t make you upset by saying _literally_ this week, I have restarted the PoC to remove the Ruby stuff

My goal is to preserve as much of the 1.x.x API as possible, but there are some clunky things in the API I?d really like to address. There is implementation code, and the ergonomics of the public facing API. It will take some time to get to a v2.x.x anyway (so don?t be too worried about that upgrade)

If you?re keen to get your hands on early draft, let me know - i?ll post here anyway

Happy monday! Back with more questions. I found that in the autogeneration if the struct has a field that is a pointer and has omit empty tag the `min=1` tag is ignored. For example: ```type Example struct { FeldOne []*string `json:"fieldOne,omitempty" pact:"min=1"` }``` My tests were failing because the field was nil. When i removed the `omitempty` it seemed to work. I was digging through code it _seems_ like it's because it relies heavily on `json.Marshal` . I don't think this is a bug, but wanted to verify the behavior. I can also 100% open a GH issue. I'm not sure where the best place to interact on things like this.

has joined #pact-go

Is there good documentation for contract testing Go lambdas?

Not that I?m aware of. Is there a particular issue you?re having?

Is it a direct lambda invocation? Is it at the end of a queue? is it used in an HTTP context? You can see how writing a guide for this could be difficult, because lambda is just one of the runtimes

makes sense

But what issues are you having? Happy to help!

Sorry Zach, I somehow missed this

Somebody raised a PR related to this today - https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-go/issues/140. I?ll look into it later in the week, but thought I?d get it in front of you in case it?s helpful

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

Should pacts tests sit alongside unit tests (my gin api handler unit tests are under `pkg/api/v1/..` ) or alongside integration tests at the top level?

On the consumer side, I would have them sit as a unit test

on the provider side it?s up to you. I usually run them as unit tests, because often you?re going to stub out a layer that requires access to code (e.g. you might stub out your repository etc.)

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

Hi there! My name is HeyTaco!, and you can use me to give people tacos to show your appreciation. My tacos will spread joy through Slack!

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

Hi everyone, I got a problem that cannot download pact from pactflow for provider test. I attached configuration screenshot. Please help me to solve this problem.

It's saying there are no pacts to verify because it can't find any in the broker. have you published pacts to the broker already and if so what tags have you used?

See howtolearn for a ci/cd workshop that goes thru this and the docs on tags

Here are a number of useful hands-on labs that teach all of the key concepts https://docs.pact.io/implementation_guides/workshops

I have published to pactflow already.

I checked the version or even tags are correct.

Can you please share the tags you have published and/or screenshot of the pact you're expecting to verify? Also your provider is not currently specifying any tags. Can you please set loglevel to debug and share the output?

Here is the published pact that I'm try to verify, and the log when execute provider test (I added tags in pact verify configuration) ```=== RUN TestPactProvider Come here 2020/10/08 12:30:19 [DEBUG] pact setup logging 2020/10/08 12:30:19 [DEBUG] pact setup 2020/10/08 12:30:19 [DEBUG] setting up a service manager 2020/10/08 12:30:19 [DEBUG] setting up a service manager 2020/10/08 12:30:19 [DEBUG] setting up a service manager 2020/10/08 12:30:19 [DEBUG] setting up a service manager 2020/10/08 12:30:19 [DEBUG] starting service creation monitor 2020/10/08 12:30:19 [DEBUG] starting service removal monitor 2020/10/08 12:30:19 [DEBUG] starting service creation monitor 2020/10/08 12:30:19 [DEBUG] starting service removal monitor 2020/10/08 12:30:19 [DEBUG] starting service removal monitor 2020/10/08 12:30:19 [DEBUG] starting service creation monitor 2020/10/08 12:30:19 [DEBUG] starting service creation monitor 2020/10/08 12:30:19 [DEBUG] starting service removal monitor 2020/10/08 12:30:19 [DEBUG] starting new proxy with opts {http 127.0.0.1:59744 0 [] /__setup } 2020/10/08 12:30:19 [DEBUG] starting reverse proxy on port 59746 2020/10/08 12:30:19 [DEBUG] waiting for port 59746 to become available on localhost after 10s 2020/10/08 12:30:19 [DEBUG] pact provider verification 2020/10/08 12:30:19 [DEBUG] client: verifying a provider 2020/10/08 12:30:19 [DEBUG] waiting for port 59746 to become available on localhost after 10s 2020/10/08 12:30:19 [DEBUG] starting verification service with args: [--format json --provider-base-url http://localhost:59746 --pact-broker-base-url https://VALID-DOMAIN.pactflow.io --broker-token {VALID_TOKEN} --provider_app_version 1.0-SNAPSHOT --provider Our Provider - edited --publish_verification_results true --consumer-version-tag master] pact.go:413: No pacts found to verify. Check the tags provided (master) for your broker (https://VALID-DOMAIN.pactflow.io) are correct --- FAIL: TestPactProvider (1.15s)```

so `VALID-DOMAIN` is valid?

yes, I just hide it

```=== RUN TestPactProvider Come here 2020/10/08 12:37:28 [DEBUG] pact setup logging 2020/10/08 12:37:28 [DEBUG] pact setup 2020/10/08 12:37:28 [DEBUG] setting up a service manager 2020/10/08 12:37:28 [DEBUG] setting up a service manager 2020/10/08 12:37:28 [DEBUG] setting up a service manager 2020/10/08 12:37:28 [DEBUG] setting up a service manager 2020/10/08 12:37:28 [DEBUG] starting service creation monitor 2020/10/08 12:37:28 [DEBUG] starting service removal monitor 2020/10/08 12:37:28 [DEBUG] starting service removal monitor 2020/10/08 12:37:28 [DEBUG] starting service removal monitor 2020/10/08 12:37:28 [DEBUG] starting service creation monitor 2020/10/08 12:37:28 [DEBUG] starting service creation monitor 2020/10/08 12:37:28 [DEBUG] starting service creation monitor 2020/10/08 12:37:28 [DEBUG] starting service removal monitor 2020/10/08 12:37:28 [DEBUG] starting new proxy with opts {http 127.0.0.1:59970 0 [] /__setup <nil>} 2020/10/08 12:37:28 [DEBUG] starting reverse proxy on port 59972 2020/10/08 12:37:28 [DEBUG] waiting for port 59972 to become available on localhost after 10s 2020/10/08 12:37:28 [DEBUG] pact provider verification 2020/10/08 12:37:28 [DEBUG] client: verifying a provider 2020/10/08 12:37:28 [DEBUG] waiting for port 59972 to become available on localhost after 10s 2020/10/08 12:37:28 [DEBUG] starting verification service with args: [--format json --provider-base-url http://localhost:59972 --pact-broker-base-url https://VALID_DOMAIN.pactflow.io --broker-token {VALID_TOKEN} --provider_app_version 1.0-SNAPSHOT --provider Our Provider - edited --publish_verification_results true] pact.go:413: No pacts found to verify --- FAIL: TestPactProvider (0.95s)``` here is the log without tags configuration.

has joined #pact-go

OK, I hope it?s not the case - but could you please remove all spaces from your provider name and see if that fixes it? If so, could you also please raise a bug?

I?m wondering if _that?s_ the issue

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

```=== RUN TestPactProvider Come here 2020/10/09 09:41:58 [DEBUG] pact setup logging 2020/10/09 09:41:58 [DEBUG] pact setup 2020/10/09 09:41:58 [DEBUG] setting up a service manager 2020/10/09 09:41:58 [DEBUG] setting up a service manager 2020/10/09 09:41:58 [DEBUG] starting service creation monitor 2020/10/09 09:41:58 [DEBUG] starting service creation monitor 2020/10/09 09:41:58 [DEBUG] setting up a service manager 2020/10/09 09:41:58 [DEBUG] setting up a service manager 2020/10/09 09:41:58 [DEBUG] starting service creation monitor 2020/10/09 09:41:58 [DEBUG] starting service removal monitor 2020/10/09 09:41:58 [DEBUG] starting service removal monitor 2020/10/09 09:41:58 [DEBUG] starting service removal monitor 2020/10/09 09:41:58 [DEBUG] starting service removal monitor 2020/10/09 09:41:58 [DEBUG] starting service creation monitor 2020/10/09 09:41:58 [DEBUG] starting new proxy with opts {http 127.0.0.1:61568 0 [] /__setup } 2020/10/09 09:41:58 [DEBUG] starting reverse proxy on port 61570 2020/10/09 09:41:58 [DEBUG] waiting for port 61570 to become available on localhost after 10s 2020/10/09 09:41:58 [DEBUG] pact provider verification 2020/10/09 09:41:58 [DEBUG] client: verifying a provider 2020/10/09 09:41:58 [DEBUG] waiting for port 61570 to become available on localhost after 10s 2020/10/09 09:41:58 [DEBUG] starting verification service with args: [--format json --provider-base-url http://localhost:61570 --pact-broker-base-url https://VALID_DOMAIN.pactflow.io --broker-token VALID_TOKEN --provider_app_version 1.0-SNAPSHOT --provider sample_provider --publish_verification_results true] pact.go:413: No pacts found to verify --- FAIL: TestPactProvider (1.39s)``` I changed names of consumer & provider, but issue still occurs :disappointed:

Can you please re-share your code here? (as a code snippet preferably)

here is the code ```// Configuration / Test Data var dir, _ = os.Getwd() var pactDir = fmt.Sprintf("%s/../../pacts", dir) var logDir = fmt.Sprintf("%s/log", dir) var port, _ = utils.GetFreePort() // The Provider verification func TestPactProvider(t *testing.T) { fmt.Println("Come here") //go startInstrumentedProvider(t) pact := dsl.Pact{ Provider: "Our Provider - edited", LogDir: logDir, PactDir: pactDir, DisableToolValidityCheck: true, LogLevel: "DEBUG", } // Verify the Provider - Tag-based Published Pacts for any known consumers _, err := pact.VerifyProvider(t, types.VerifyRequest{ ProviderBaseURL: fmt.Sprintf("http://127.0.0.1:%d", port), Tags: []string{"master"}, FailIfNoPactsFound: true, // Use this if you want to test without the Pact Broker // PactURLs: []string{filepath.FromSlash(fmt.Sprintf("%s/goadminservice-gouserservice.json", os.Getenv("PACT_DIR")))}, BrokerURL: "https://VALID_DOMAIN.pactflow.io", BrokerToken: "VALID_TOKEN", PublishVerificationResults: true, ProviderVersion: "1.0-SNAPSHOT", PactLogDir: logDir, Provider: "sample_provider", }) if err != nil { t.Fatal(err) } }```

OK, sorry for the pain

can you please execute the `pact-provider-verifier` binary directly with the args ```--format json --provider-base-url http://localhost:61570 --pact-broker-base-url https://VALID_DOMAIN.pactflow.io --broker-token VALID_TOKEN --provider_app_version 1.0-SNAPSHOT --provider sample_provider --publish_verification_results true --verbose```

obviously replacing your specific tokens

if you can DM me, I can also try and reproduce locally and check pactflow logs. lemme know

has joined #pact-go

:wave:hey friends

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

I was successful to get contracts from pactflow in provider side. However, I just started 1 service, it depends on others. Thus, provider test was fail because of others services not started. What should I to solve the problem now? Should I start whole system or just start 1 service and mock all dependencies?

Have a look at http://docs.pact.io and search for ?downstream systems?, there?s a whole thing on it

thank you @matt.fellows. I read it now.

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

@alik.berezovsky has left the channel

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

:wave: I'm currently evaluating using Pact at my company. We're a Node (JS) and Go shop, primarily, and I work on a team focused on AuthN / AuthZ. I've found using Pact to be pretty painless so far, but I'm running into issues with provider state. Now, I _believe_ that most of my pain points can be solved with 3.0 support for multiple provider states, and have worked that out on the NodeJS side already; however, I'm struggling on the Go side. While using the external provider verification CLI tooling will work for verifying consumer contracts written from a JS consumer, I am not aware of a way to write Go consumer 3.0 Pact files. Is there a solution I'm not aware of for this, or is it on the near-term roadmap at all ? It's hard to determine what current priorities are for various features / languages...

So I?m currently working on pact v3 support (see https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-go/issues/142) however the bad news is that things are still experimental. I?m aiming to have a beta by Q4 2020.

If it?s just the provider side you need, I may be able to prioritise that to unblock you

> Now, I _believe_ that most of my pain points can be solved with 3.0 support for multiple provider states This is usually worked around fairly easily. Could you please elaborate on why you think that will solve your issue? Multiple states is more of a convenience thing if any

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

> If it?s just the provider side you need, I may be able to prioritise that to unblock you It's actually the consumer-side that I'm more interested in since it would allow me to generate 3.0 contracts from a Go consumer. With the external provider verifier CLI I could run the provider-side tests against a running set of images with provider state endpoints, but need a way to generate the contracts themselves. At our company we have a majority of Go services with a smattering of Node services, and several separate SPA UI's which are JS. Go is a big part of our path to adoption of Pact. At any rate, thanks for even considering prioritization! Having consumers generate 3.0 spec files would make it much easier for me to promote adoption of Pact as our company's contract testing standard :slightly_smiling_face: > Could you please elaborate on why you think that will solve your issue? Sure! It's entirely possible that I'm not thinking about things in the right way, or leveraging everything available in 2.0. In one case, we aggregate responses from various downstream services (API gateways & BFF's). During my spike, I found it increasingly difficult to use bespoke strings for every permutation that results in a different contract. For instance, we have a "team join" permissions endpoint which aggregates information from "invites", "open-enrollment", and other services in order to make a decision on what sort of UX we send a user through. Thinking about this now, though, I could think about this in terms of user flow which would result in fewer "states". I could see the multiple provider states as more of a convenience here so that we could share them across interactions. In another case, we actually have an intermediary "edge" which is mostly invisible to providers, but provides headers which are necessary. A good example of this is with authorized sessions. The edge gateway is responsible for verifying any individual request's headers and adding user identity headers to a request. From the consumer's perspective, this data is typically sent in the form of a cookie which then translates to a valid user ID in the edge gateway headers that the provider consumes. I've dealt with this case by introducing a special header state in the Pact file such as "a valid session exists for the current user". The provider verification step can then translate that into the expected edge headers. However, now I'm stuck duplicating this in every interaction ? varying it periodically to deal with "session invalid" status codes.

Apologies for the wall of text @matt.fellows , but I hope that gives you better context.

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

no worries at all. I somehow missed your response too

I?ve just taken a look at the Pact Go code

Technically, message pacts is a v3 thing - so the current Go package does sort of support this. I need to confirm that multiple states will propagate for (1) (I think they will). The next issue is verifying on the provider side, which is JS (also not fully v3 compatible yet, or rather, we haven?t added support for messages in the v3 branch).

It may be the case that the current implementation will actually invoke all of the provider states, in which case, we can get that fairly quickly into the current ecosystem

Otherwise, even if I get the Go consumer code updated for you, you?ll still suffer from needing to actually _verify_ it in JS!

Leave it with me, i?ll look into it tonight

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

has joined #pact-go

Hello, how I can make a matcher like /resource/:uuid ?

Could you use a regex matcher?

has joined #pact-go

Sure, I think is the easiest one. The go package has dsl.UUID but I don't know how to combine matchers

Matchers can be nested. If you show us how you're wanting to use and I can help.

```WithRequest(dsl.Request{ Method: http.MethodGet, Path: dsl.Term("/v1/accounts/1", `\d+`), }).``` I want to switch this /1 and \d+ with the dsl.UUID(), all my endpoints are using UUID as id

Another strange thing is `Expected header "Content-Type" to match /application\/json/, but was nil`

but send the same request as pact is sending to provider api I'm getting the Content-Type header

has joined #pact-go

@billal.patel has left the channel

has joined #pact-go