9:17 a.m.
+1 for investigate. I hope the contributor can help us with clarifying
it and write the test?
Maybe the test for this will need to be in separate class, so it's
possible to test it separately from the other Google IDP stuff, which
can be tested with free account. And the other contributors to Google
IDP, which don't have corporate account, won't be blocked.
But I suppose that for our CI, we can test with "redhat.com" domain account?
Marek
On 06/06/18 15:22, Stian Thorgersen wrote:
I think we're in agreement here that the ideal is to do proper
integration tests. Rather than open the doors for mocks (java based or
http based) we should attempt to do it proper. For Google I'm not sure
how realistic that is as the hd param probably requires an corporate
account rather than a freebie account that we are using today for
testing. We should investigate that first though.
On 6 June 2018 at 10:03, Hynek Mlnarik <hmlnarik(a)redhat.com
<mailto:hmlnarik@redhat.com>> wrote:
To answer the original question whether to mock or not to mock, I
wouldn't
object allowing those in unit tests (which we have not that many
though
until now there's no need to them and I hope we can preserve this
state).
I'd rather not introduce those in integration tests because of
maintenance
costs.
The biggest issue I see with mocks is that one needs to be extra
careful to
return exactly what's expected from the specification/counterparty.
Since social
providers can change without prior notice, our mocked IdPs might
give us
false impression that we're testing them. Furthermore, such mocks
would be
rather complex, and would require non-trivial maintenance. I'm
hence biased
against mock IdPs and prefer the tests with real IdPs as mentioned
by Marek.
On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 11:22 AM, Marek Posolda
<mposolda(a)redhat.com <mailto:mposolda@redhat.com>> wrote:
> Dne 1.6.2018 v 14:48 Bill Burke napsal(a):
> > On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 5:18 AM, Marek Posolda
<mposolda(a)redhat.com <mailto:mposolda@redhat.com>>
> wrote:
> >> For IDP, I am not sure how would Mocked IDP help? We already
have lots
> of
> >> test coverage for Identity brokering for OIDC and SAML. The
social
> providers
> >> usually implements OAuth/OIDC and there are just small
differences
> between
> >> them. But those small differences and the fact that social
providers
> are out
> >> of our control, is exactly the reason why we need to test
with real
> >> providers instead of mocks IMO.
> >>
> > IDP mocks are not a replacement for real testing. Just
something that
> > would run in public CI, that way at least there's something to
catch
> > issues like when/if brokering gets refactored again.
> AFAIK the longer-term plan is to run social tests on every PR,
to catch
> regressions by testing with real social providers. So maybe it's
better
> to rather wait until we have that rather then introduce mocks now?
>
> Also anyone from community should be able to run social tests
based on
> our README. The important is, that someone could run it just for
single
> provider, which he is interested in (EG. Google for this PR) and
is not
> required to create the account+application in all social providers,
> which we support. But I hope the social tests already support
this now.
>
> Marek
> >
> > Bill
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> keycloak-dev mailing list
> keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:keycloak-dev@lists.jboss.org>
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev
<https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev>
>
--
--Hynek
_______________________________________________
keycloak-dev mailing list
keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:keycloak-dev@lists.jboss.org>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev
<https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev>