- This test, though I understand why it was added, is not necessary in
my opinion. It's more difficult to get this test to pass since we don't
call session.run, we call session.writeTransaction which has a callback
that calls transaction.run...
- I think we don't need to test that our third party library does what
it was added to do... they have their own tests, which can be found here
@roschaefer, which I think are sufficient https://github.com/validatorjs/validator.js/blob/master/test/sanitizers.js
- We can always add another type of test, if you feel necessary, maybe
an e2e?
- the test is broken, can you have a look @roschaefer??
- I tried to get it to work, but it's complicated with multiple
promises... I'm ok if we remove this test as well as it's only testing
that normalizeEmail works as it's supposed to... but that hopefully is
tested on the side of the validator library
- Refactoring without tests makes it riskier
- Move some tests from resolver to middleware unit tests to live closer
to where the validation happens, remove duplicate tests
- DRY out code
We had this error in our neo4j pod recently:
```
2019-12-02 08:29:42.680+0000 ERROR Unable to schedule bolt session 'bolt-1018230' for execution since there are no available threads to serve it at the moment. You can retry at a later time or consider increasing max thread pool size for bolt connector(s).
2019-12-02 08:29:42.680+0000 ERROR Unable to schedule bolt session 'bolt-1018224' for execution since there are no available threads to serve it at the moment. You can retry at a later time or consider increasing max thread pool size for bolt connector(s).
2019-12-02 08:29:42.681+0000 ERROR Unable to schedule bolt session 'bolt-1018352' for execution since there are no available threads to serve it at the moment. You can retry at a later time or consider increasing max thread pool size for bolt connector(s).
2019-12-02 08:29:42.682+0000 ERROR Unable to schedule bolt session 'bolt-1018243' for execution since there are no available threads to serve it at the moment. You can retry at a later time or consider increasing max thread pool size for bolt connector(s).
```
Apparently the default is 400 threads. So we must have a leak somewhere.
- update script
- use readTxResult for validateReview
- favor more verbose variables
- do not set review.closed as we close the report and the rule at the
moment is set to 'latestReviewUpdatedAtRules' rule, so it's clear the
last review must have been the one that closed the report
- Set up/tear down should not needlessly run http requests. These tests
are not designed to test that the report/review process works as
expected. that is the job of their respective unit tests/e2e tests.
I had a chat with our moderator Daniel. He asks us to remove dots from
gmail accounts. He finds it more consistent and he has no problem to
write a mail to a gmail address without dots. He is OK to save the
email address different from how a user memorizes it.
- we were making multiple http requests to report resources in this
test, now we are bypassing these requests by setting the database up to
how we want to test, then testing what we want in isolation.
- also added tests for closing a report
- favor union for returning resource
- simplify review mutation
- moved to Report node, as the report was reviewed by the moderator...
a resource can have many reports on them, so we are interested in
grouping reviewed/filed by report
