has joined #pact-ruby-xml

has joined #pact-ruby-xml

@such.su I'll ask the person who is interested in implementing the xml matching to join this channel so they can keep you updated when it starts.

Awesome, thank you Beth.

has joined #pact-ruby-xml

Hey, I guess the person in question is me :slightly_smiling_face:. I'm on holiday at the moment, returning in 2 weeks. Plan to start to work on the implementation then with the help from @bethskurrie.

Current workarounds for pact XML assertions for us (company I work for) are: * generate match for match responses - when none of the returned values change (strictly not a contract tests - as we are forced to care about every field even though we might not) * use regex expressions (can get complex quickly for deeply nested structures and assertion on the full path is required)

Hey @uldis.sturms thanks for the input. I am still a bit confused:thinking_face: could you be more elaborate on `generate match for match responses`?

Hi @such.su, that's my english there :smile:. `generate matching response for interaction` would probably be more appropriate.

We use `pact-js` and in javascript it is quite easy to use function composition to generate expected responses based on requests.

Let's say there is a fields `x`in request that is uuid and is generated, we would then use the same uuid to generate expected response in case that fields was included in response.

We've seen this with some APIs that implement some sorts of correlation ids.

Some of these _hacks_ can probably go away once we have proper XML support in pact.

At times another thing we need to do is regenerate pact contract every time on build server because *provider* does idempotency checks - so that request with the same values will fail.

Hmm, I got it. Thank you very much:handshake:

has joined #pact-ruby-xml

Hey, I have some time now. Would love to start working on adding the implementation. @bethskurrie - do you have some time this week to kick it off?

That?s awesome!!!

Hi @uldis.sturms, sorry, it's been my turn to be on holidays.

I'll get back to you next week if that's OK.

Absolutely, enjoy @bethskurrie!

:wave:@bethskurrie @uldis.sturms About the XML implementation is there a roadmap or plan coming out?

We're catching up this weekend to discuss it.

In this channel?

I hadn't actually thought that far.

Are you interested in helping out?

I would love to but I know nothing about Ruby currently:joy:

It might be a tricky introduction!

Yup, sorry?

@uldis.sturms it might be worth searching for pure ruby XML parsers, because of jruby

There are only about 3 people and a dog using jruby, but XML is the kind of thing that jruby users would use

Have a look at the last commit to pact-xml. I've made the "string with matching rules" class that will be passed in to the differ.

todo: I need to fix the travis build for ruby 2.2

@bethskurrie great, will do.

why do we need pact_specification_version in that object?

also what is the purpose of expected_xml_string? should we not just use matching rules?

Is it a fallback if no matching rules are specified?

The matching rules are in a different format between v2 and v3

You'll only need to deal with v3, so you can ignore it for now.

Well may need it for v4.

okay

You know when you make a pact term, and you give it a matcher, and a value to generate?

In this case, the XML string is the generated value, and the matcher is in the matching rules.

It takes a while to get your head around it.

But we only match on the rules, right? The generated value is used as a stub response for consumer in mock-server and the actual request for provider, right?

If there is no rule for a particular path, the match is done against the same path in the expected XML string.

I would start without the rules, personally. Just do a plain diff, one that allows extra nodes and attributes, and one that does not.

Get that working, and we'll try it out with the whole pact gem.

Then, we can add the rules on top.

Okay, understood.

:+1:

Hey, I?ve put in first pull request for some stuff to get initial feedback to see if I?m going in the right direction. https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-xml/pull/1

I welcome logic & style comments as I?ve never done anything too serious in ruby before.

Thinking of putting in rubocop or something of that sorts to lint code for best practices.

Is rubocop still the way to lint code in Ruby btw?

Initially seems that we should be able to get away with using Ruby native REXML lib. Not the fastest and nicest to work with but hey - at least it is not nokogiri and installs fast.

Was also looking at Ox - seemed quite cool but wasn?t sure about the JRuby support as it build C native code as well.

One plus of using REXML was the distinction between elements & attributes.

REXML sounds like a good choice then @uldis.sturms

I've used rubocop before, and would again.

I've been meaning to introduce it into the other projects, but have never gotten around to it.

I've merged the PR, and I've created an end to end test for it.

* Here is the repo and branch: https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-ruby-e2e-example/tree/feat/pact-xml * Here is the travis build https://travis-ci.org/pact-foundation/pact-ruby-e2e-example

When the expectations match the actual, everything passes. When there is a mismatch, something goes wrong in the rendering of the diff.

It looks like what is being pass into to the diff formatter is not what it is expecting. It should be the result of the Diff call, which is an array, but it looks like it's expecting a Difference object.

Awesome work on this so far though!

Thanks for merging @bethskurrie & feedback.

Let me know if you find anything that needs changing in the standard pact libs - from what I've seen, it should "just work" once you've tweaked the diff formatter.

We can do a release once the no-rules matching is done, and see if we can find some beta testers for it.

has joined #pact-ruby-xml

@uldis.sturms, thanks for this initial implementation, I was literally just now looking into pact-xml, as we want to be able to verify both JSON and XML contracts, and saw your pull request. I'm happy to help with any work on this, or to beta-test once it is in a state that needs some actual use cases. Also, thanks @bethskurrie for all your work and contributions to Pact. I'm just learning it, seeing the tremendous value, and championing it within my organization. Looking forward to learning and doing more with it, and hope to be able to contribute back to this project as well!

Welcome @jim. Feel free to open a PR if you see anything to improve or fix. :wink:

@bethskurrie this PR should fix the formatting issue: https://github.com/pact-foundation/pact-xml/pull/2

More details there - did't want to flood Slack. But seems that I did anyways :smile:

has joined #pact-ruby-xml

we've lost our history because it's a free slack account. Who was working on pact xml please?

has joined #pact-ruby-xml

Hi @bethskurrie, sorry for the late reply haven?t been using Slack for long time. If I remember correctly then we got to a point where we could integrate XML matching with the core project?

Not using Soap anymore, since I moved on to a different project but would be kind of cool to see it through. Happy to do fix ups, cleanups extra features. Just give me a shout here or via email if I don?t reply in a day or so. :wink:

has joined #pact-ruby-xml

has joined #pact-ruby-xml

has joined #pact-ruby-xml

has joined #pact-ruby-xml

has joined #pact-ruby-xml

has joined #pact-ruby-xml