Example error:
Tag Rules creating allows creation of rules of each type
Failure/Error: expect(tag_rule.preferred_shipping_method_tags).to eq "volunteers-only"
expected: "volunteers-only"
got: ""
(compared using ==)
# ./spec/features/admin/tag_rules_spec.rb:81:in `block (3 levels) in <top (required)>'
Error:
As an Administrator
I want to be able to manage products in bulk
updating when a filter has been applied
Failure/Error: expect(page.find("#status-message")).to have_content "Changes saved."
expected to find text "Changes saved." in "Saving.."
# ./spec/features/admin/bulk_product_update_spec.rb:451:in `block (2 levels) in <top (required)>'
Setting `locals: { :@order => order }` no longer works; `@order` is not set as expected in the partial. Fixes various errors eg:
Failure/Error: = "#{@order.number}"
ActionView::Template::Error:
undefined method `number' for nil:NilClass
# ./app/views/spree/admin/orders/invoice.html.haml:14:in `_app_views_spree_admin_orders_invoice_html_haml__1740595365701113578_70025078036080'
# ./app/services/invoice_renderer.rb:3:in `render_to_string'
# ./app/controllers/spree/admin/orders_controller.rb:89:in `invoice'
Removes use of #handle_asynchronously, which we need to do elsewhere. Fixes:
BulkInvoiceService#start_pdf_job starts a background process to create a pdf with multiple invoices
Failure/Error:
expect do
service.start_pdf_job [1, 2]
end.to enqueue_job Delayed::PerformableMethod
expected to enqueue exactly 1 jobs, but enqueued 0
# ./spec/services/bulk_invoice_service_spec.rb:8:in `block (3 levels) in <top (required)>'
The enterprise id returned by these json endpoints was being returned in *unicode* format, so where Angular was expecting a simple integer it was instead getting strings like: "\u0017"
For some reason when using `render text:` instead of `render json:` for this response, the status code being returned was 200 instead of the clearly explicitly defined 422 (:unprocessable_entity). I absolutely have no idea why!
This route checks if an enterprise permalink is taken or not. Allowing the route to be accessed via Javascript without strict CSRF protection is reasonable. Fixes the following errors:
ActionController::InvalidCrossOriginRequest: Security warning: an embedded <script> tag on another site requested protected JavaScript. If you know what you're doing, go ahead and disable forgery protection on this action to permit cross-origin JavaScript embedding.
