chore: enabling integration tests

[Anas12091101]

What are the relevant tickets?

#354

What does this PR do?

This PR fixes integration tests and adds them to the GitHub CI workflow.

How should this be manually tested?

• Check the CI run and verify that the tests run and pass.

For local testing:

• Ensure your local edx-sga repo is in the src folder in the edx workspace.
• Delete the pytest.ini file using rm ./pytest.ini.
• Copy the setup.cfg file from edx-platform using cp /edx/app/edxapp/edx-platform/setup.cfg ..
• Run tests using pytest ./edx_sga/tests/integration_tests.py.
• Verify that all tests pass.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 61.40%. Comparing base (5f18e95) to head (7e48031).

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #355      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   53.75%   61.40%   +7.65%     
==========================================
  Files          16       16              
  Lines        1680     1705      +25     
  Branches      115      115              
==========================================
+ Hits          903     1047     +144     
+ Misses        764      642     -122     
- Partials       13       16       +3     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[arslanashraf7]

@Anas12091101 We need to add codecov.yaml file for the coverage configurations checks that are failing above. A reference of that can be seen in our rapid response xBlock here. We can configure codecov w.r.t comments, coverage checks and behaviour. More details on codecov.yaml can be seen here.

[Anas12091101]

@Anas12091101 We need to add codecov.yaml file for the coverage configurations checks that are failing above.

@arslanashraf7 thanks for your comment. I think we don't need to add codecov.yml file here. The coverage was failing before because codecov was not covering the integration tests. Now all the checks are passing and the PR is ready for review

[arslanashraf7]

@Anas12091101 We need to add codecov.yaml file for the coverage configurations checks that are failing above.

@arslanashraf7 thanks for your comment. I think we don't need to add codecov.yml file here. The coverage was failing before because codecov was not covering the integration tests. Now all the checks are passing and the PR is ready for review

wow, That increased the coverage to the passing limit. But whenever we need to make changes in how codecov is configured we will need to add it. But thanks for letting me know. I'll take a look at the PR.

[arslanashraf7]

@Anas12091101 Could you rebase this PR?

[Anas12091101]

I was getting an error in the CI on make dev.clone.https command: make: *** No rule to make target 'dev.clone.https'. Stop.

I also reproduced the error locally. The command works fine in the openedx/devstack repository.

I replaced https://github.com/edx/devstack with https://github.com/openedx/devstack.

[Anas12091101]

I tried to test this in the rapid response repo which is also using https://github.com/edx/devstack repository. The test PR throws the same error in the CI run.

[arslanashraf7]

Thanks for making this change.

[arslanashraf7]

Just one last question, the rest is looking great.

[arslanashraf7]

Can you tell me more about why we needed this mocking? What made the existing tests break, were they not getting the StaffGradedAssignmentXBlock object now or was there some other reason?

[Anas12091101]

I was getting no submission object when the test was running. When I dig into it, I found that our SGA xblock is created with the staff user name in the make_one fn and our submission is being made with the student_id. The test is using block.student_view() which is calling self.student_state() -> self.get_submission() -> self.get_student_item_dict(student_id is None). By default the student_id is None and hence the xblock sets the student_id to the staff_id here. Therefore I mocked the get_submission method to use the student_id of the student, by which we have created the submission and not the staff id.

[arslanashraf7]

Alright, So, wouldn't it make sense to create both the SGA block and the submission with Student ID when we are testing it with a student? We might probably achieve this by adding an extra param in make_one method it uses the staff username as default when the username isn't passed to the function, otherwise use the username passed?

[arslanashraf7]

Thanks for making this change.

[arslanashraf7]

@Anas12091101 I've re-run tests on this PR to check if a new xBlock package is available and if that fixes the issue now.

[arslanashraf7]

👍 Thanks for the patience on this. Don't forget to squash & merge.