-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 33.6k
Add ability to load fixtures as SsdpServiceInfo in tests #144094
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
Hey there @chemelli74, mind taking a look at this pull request as it has been labeled with an integration ( Code owner commandsCode owners of
|
def load_ssdp_fixture(filename: str, integration: str | None = None) -> SsdpServiceInfo: | ||
"""Load a SsdpServiceInfo object from a fixture.""" | ||
kwargs = load_json_object_fixture(filename, integration) | ||
return SsdpServiceInfo(**kwargs) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should this be loading the files in the executor?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I can easily add... is that something we wish to encourage on all new fixture loads or just ssdp?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
In general, it should be on all new fixtures since we're loading them in the event loop
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Isn't this something we should fix more globally? As in, should we make the load async and just do it in the helper function?
I'm also interested how we can make the loading of fixtures more efficient because I'm sure my integrations do IO at every test while we could make that faster by only loading them once, but i never looked into it as i would like to know more on how the correct way is
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Do we need to distinguish between module constants versus dynamically loaded fixtures? 🤔
I think it makes sense to load dynamic fixtures via the executor... but I guess module constants would need to be migrated (maybe to pytest fixtures? Or loaded dynamically?)
I'm closing, because I think |
Proposed change
Since we now have an easy way to copy a UPNP dump from the new frontend SSDP browser (System -> Network), having the ability to dump the json into a fixture and load it directly into a
SsdpServiceInfo
object will encourage developpers to use "real-life" objects instead of partial or minimalist objects.Type of change
Additional information
Checklist
ruff format homeassistant tests
)If user exposed functionality or configuration variables are added/changed:
If the code communicates with devices, web services, or third-party tools:
Updated and included derived files by running:
python3 -m script.hassfest
.requirements_all.txt
.Updated by running
python3 -m script.gen_requirements_all
.To help with the load of incoming pull requests: