* fix: add missing vi.mock() calls to prevent vitest worker shutdown flakiness
Add vi.mock() calls for modules that trigger background network requests
or database connections during import. These transitive imports can cause
the vitest worker RPC to shut down while pending fetch/network operations
are still in flight, resulting in flaky test failures with:
Error: [vitest-worker]: Closing rpc while "fetch" was pending
The primary modules mocked are:
- @calcom/app-store/delegationCredential (triggers credential lookups)
- @calcom/prisma (triggers database initialization)
- @calcom/features/calendars/lib/CalendarManager (triggers calendar API calls)
- @calcom/features/auth/lib/verifyEmail (triggers email service)
- @calcom/lib/domainManager/organization (triggers domain lookups)
Co-Authored-By: Devin AI <158243242+devin-ai-integration[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
* fix: remove conflicting empty prisma mocks from files with prismock/prismaMock setups
- Remove vi.mock('@calcom/prisma', () => ({ default: {}, prisma: {} })) from 28 files
that already have prismock/prismaMock test doubles. Vitest hoists all vi.mock() calls
and the last one wins, so these empty mocks were overriding the functional test doubles.
- Fix CalendarSubscriptionService.test.ts to reuse the shared mock from
__mocks__/delegationCredential instead of creating a new unconfigured vi.fn()
- Remove DelegationCredentialRepository.test.ts empty prisma mock (different pattern)
- Remove vi.mock from inside beforeEach in intentToCreateOrg.handler.test.ts
Co-Authored-By: Devin AI <158243242+devin-ai-integration[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
* fix: add comprehensive delegationCredential mock exports to prevent CI test failures
The vi.mock blocks for @calcom/app-store/delegationCredential were missing
exports that the code under test transitively imports (e.g.
enrichUsersWithDelegationCredentials, enrichUserWithDelegationCredentialsIncludeServiceAccountKey,
buildAllCredentials, getFirstDelegationConferencingCredentialAppLocation).
Added all exports with passthrough implementations so the booking flow
works correctly without triggering real network requests.
Co-Authored-By: Devin AI <158243242+devin-ai-integration[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
* fix: correct credential mock return shapes to match real module API
Co-Authored-By: Devin AI <158243242+devin-ai-integration[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
* fix: revert unintended yarn.lock changes
Co-Authored-By: Devin AI <158243242+devin-ai-integration[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
---------
Co-authored-by: Devin AI <158243242+devin-ai-integration[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
127 lines
3.8 KiB
TypeScript
127 lines
3.8 KiB
TypeScript
import dayjs from "@calcom/dayjs";
|
|
import { checkDurationLimit, checkDurationLimits } from "@calcom/features/bookings/lib/checkDurationLimits";
|
|
import { validateIntervalLimitOrder } from "@calcom/lib/intervalLimits/validateIntervalLimitOrder";
|
|
import { describe, expect, it, vi } from "vitest";
|
|
|
|
const mockGetTotalBookingDuration = vi.fn();
|
|
vi.mock("@calcom/features/bookings/repositories/BookingRepository", () => ({
|
|
BookingRepository: vi.fn().mockImplementation(function () {
|
|
return {
|
|
getTotalBookingDuration: mockGetTotalBookingDuration,
|
|
};
|
|
}),
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
vi.mock("@calcom/prisma", () => ({
|
|
default: {},
|
|
prisma: {},
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
type MockData = {
|
|
id: number;
|
|
startDate: Date;
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
const MOCK_DATA: MockData = {
|
|
id: 1,
|
|
startDate: dayjs("2022-09-30T09:00:00+01:00").toDate(),
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
// Path: apps/web/test/lib/checkDurationLimits.ts
|
|
describe("Check Duration Limits Tests", () => {
|
|
it("Should return no errors if limit is not reached", async () => {
|
|
mockGetTotalBookingDuration.mockResolvedValue(0);
|
|
await expect(
|
|
checkDurationLimits({ PER_DAY: 60 }, MOCK_DATA.startDate, MOCK_DATA.id)
|
|
).resolves.toBeTruthy();
|
|
});
|
|
it("Should throw an error if limit is reached", async () => {
|
|
mockGetTotalBookingDuration.mockResolvedValue(60);
|
|
await expect(
|
|
checkDurationLimits({ PER_DAY: 60 }, MOCK_DATA.startDate, MOCK_DATA.id)
|
|
).rejects.toThrowError();
|
|
});
|
|
it("Should pass with multiple duration limits", async () => {
|
|
mockGetTotalBookingDuration.mockResolvedValue(30);
|
|
await expect(
|
|
checkDurationLimits(
|
|
{
|
|
PER_DAY: 60,
|
|
PER_WEEK: 120,
|
|
},
|
|
MOCK_DATA.startDate,
|
|
MOCK_DATA.id
|
|
)
|
|
).resolves.toBeTruthy();
|
|
});
|
|
it("Should pass with multiple duration limits with one undefined", async () => {
|
|
mockGetTotalBookingDuration.mockResolvedValue(30);
|
|
await expect(
|
|
checkDurationLimits(
|
|
{
|
|
PER_DAY: 60,
|
|
PER_WEEK: undefined,
|
|
},
|
|
MOCK_DATA.startDate,
|
|
MOCK_DATA.id
|
|
)
|
|
).resolves.toBeTruthy();
|
|
});
|
|
it("Should return no errors if limit is not reached with multiple bookings", async () => {
|
|
mockGetTotalBookingDuration.mockResolvedValue(60);
|
|
await expect(
|
|
checkDurationLimits(
|
|
{
|
|
PER_DAY: 90,
|
|
PER_WEEK: 120,
|
|
},
|
|
MOCK_DATA.startDate,
|
|
MOCK_DATA.id
|
|
)
|
|
).resolves.toBeTruthy();
|
|
});
|
|
it("Should throw an error if one of the limit is reached with multiple bookings", async () => {
|
|
mockGetTotalBookingDuration.mockResolvedValue(90);
|
|
await expect(
|
|
checkDurationLimits(
|
|
{
|
|
PER_DAY: 60,
|
|
PER_WEEK: 120,
|
|
},
|
|
MOCK_DATA.startDate,
|
|
MOCK_DATA.id
|
|
)
|
|
).rejects.toThrowError();
|
|
});
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
// Path: apps/web/test/lib/checkDurationLimits.ts
|
|
describe("Check Duration Limit Tests", () => {
|
|
it("Should return no busyTimes and no error if limit is not reached", async () => {
|
|
mockGetTotalBookingDuration.mockResolvedValue(60);
|
|
await expect(
|
|
checkDurationLimit({
|
|
key: "PER_DAY",
|
|
limitingNumber: 90,
|
|
eventStartDate: MOCK_DATA.startDate,
|
|
eventId: MOCK_DATA.id,
|
|
})
|
|
).resolves.toBeUndefined();
|
|
});
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
describe("Duration limit validation", () => {
|
|
it("Should validate limit where ranges have ascending values", () => {
|
|
expect(validateIntervalLimitOrder({ PER_DAY: 30, PER_MONTH: 60 })).toBe(true);
|
|
});
|
|
it("Should invalidate limit where ranges does not have a strict ascending values", () => {
|
|
expect(validateIntervalLimitOrder({ PER_DAY: 60, PER_WEEK: 30 })).toBe(false);
|
|
});
|
|
it("Should validate a correct limit with 'gaps'", () => {
|
|
expect(validateIntervalLimitOrder({ PER_DAY: 60, PER_YEAR: 120 })).toBe(true);
|
|
});
|
|
it("Should validate empty limit", () => {
|
|
expect(validateIntervalLimitOrder({})).toBe(true);
|
|
});
|
|
});
|