The GitHub Actions job "Required Checks" on texera.git/main has succeeded. Run started by GitHub user github-merge-queue[bot] (triggered by github-merge-queue[bot]).
Head commit for run: cd4fd5a6d3845f0b7b478e1e86a31bb3151d4cd5 / Meng Wang <[email protected]> fix(test, frontend): stub Plotly in the execution-history spec (#8288) ### What changes were proposed in this PR? `workflow-execution-history.component.spec.ts` let `ngAfterViewInit` call the real `Plotly.newPlot` on every setup. 36 of its 61 tests build the component, and each build plots twice, so one run drove roughly 72 real Plotly renders through jsdom — for the benefit of a single test. That test then read `data` and `layout` back off the graph divs Plotly populates. Every value it asserted (`type`, `labels`, `values`, `x`, `y`, the widths, the titles) is one the component itself computed and handed over, so the round trip through the real library bought no coverage. It also cannot buy any here: jsdom has no layout or canvas, so whether Plotly drew anything sensible is unobservable — that belongs to the browser-mode suite, if anywhere. Mock the module for this spec and assert on the arguments passed to `newPlot` instead. The chart test now checks the component's own decision rather than Plotly's handling of it. This is what made the spec flaky rather than merely slow: the failing case on macOS was three synchronous assertions behind a `setup()`, timing out against the 20 s per-test limit under runner contention, while ubuntu and windows passed. Removing the dominant avoidable cost restores the margin; it is not a proof that Plotly was the only contributor. `user-quota` and `workflow-runtime-statistics` render real Plotly too, but at 339 ms / 25 tests and 197 ms / 12 tests they are nowhere near the limit, so they are left alone. Also corrects `TESTING.md`, which documented `ng test --test-file <path>` for single-file runs; the builder rejects that argument and the flag is `--include`. ### Any related issues, documentation, discussions? Closes #8287. ### How was this PR tested? `yarn ng test --include ".../workflow-execution-history.component.spec.ts"` — 61 passed, test time 4.12 s → 1.69 s. Failure paths checked, since the rewritten assertions must still catch what the old ones did: changing the component's pie-chart `WIDTH` from 450 to 451 turns the chart test red, and removing one of the two `Plotly.newPlot` calls does too. Restoring each returns the file to 61 passing. `eslint` is clean on the touched spec. ### Was this PR authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling? Generated-by: Claude Code (claude-opus-5) Report URL: https://github.com/apache/texera/actions/runs/33756044974 With regards, GitHub Actions via GitBox
