Refactor from jest to vitest #2483

[khushipatil1523]

Refactor : src/components/AddPeopleToTag/AddPeopleToTag.test.tsx from Jest to Vitest #2483

What kind of change does this PR introduce?

Refactor

Issue Number: #2483

Fixes #2483

Did you add tests for your changes?

Yes

Snapshots/Videos:

Summary

Migrated test for ChangeLanguageDropdown.tsx from jest to vitest.

Does this PR introduce a breaking change?

No

Have you read the contributing guide?

Yes

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Chores
  • Updated test suite for AddPeopleToTag component from Jest to Vitest
  • Modernized test writing style with more descriptive test case naming
  • Refined mocking approach for external libraries and router parameters

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

This pull request focuses on refactoring the AddPeopleToTag.spec.tsx test file from Jest to Vitest. The changes involve updating the testing framework-specific syntax, including replacing Jest mocking methods with Vitest equivalents, renaming test methods from test to it, and modifying the mocking approach for react-toastify and react-router-dom libraries. The core test logic and structure remain unchanged.

Changes

File	Change Summary
src/components/AddPeopleToTag/AddPeopleToTag.spec.tsx	- Replaced jest.mock() with vi.mock() for mocking libraries - Updated jest.clearAllMocks() to vi.clearAllMocks() - Converted test() to it() for test descriptions - Modified useParams mocking approach

Assessment against linked issues

Objective	Addressed	Explanation
Replace Jest-specific functions with Vitest equivalents [#2483]	✅
Rename from .test.tsx to .spec.tsx [#2483]	✅
Ensure tests pass using npm run test:vitest [#2483]	❓	Requires actual test run verification
Maintain 100% test coverage [#2483]	❓	Requires coverage report verification

Possibly related issues

• Refactor: /src/components/TagActions/TagActions.test.tsx from jest to vitest #3120: Refactoring TagActions.test.tsx from Jest to Vitest
• Refactor : src/components/AgendaItems/AgendaItemsUpdateModal.test.tsx from Jest to Vitest #2491: Refactoring AgendaItemsUpdateModal.test.tsx from Jest to Vitest
• Refactor: src/screens/OrganizationTags/OrganizationTags.test.tsx from Jest to Vitest #3071: Refactoring OrganizationTags.test.tsx from Jest to Vitest

Possibly related PRs

• Refactored src/components/AddOn/support/components/Action/Action.test.tsx from Jest to Vitest #2482: Similar Jest to Vitest test file refactoring
• Refactored src/components/AddOn/core/AddOnEntry/AddOnEntry.test.tsx from Jest to Vitest #2501: Migration of test files to Vitest
• Refactor: src/screens/BlockUser from Jest to Vitest  #2606: Transitioning BlockUser.spec.tsx to Vitest
• Migrated src/screens/CommunityProfile/* from Jest to Vitest #3115: Migrating CommunityProfile.spec.tsx to Vitest
• Refacted : src/components/LeftDrawer/LeftDrawer.test.tsx from Jest to Vitest #3134: Refactoring LeftDrawer.spec.tsx to Vitest

Suggested labels

refactor

Suggested reviewers

• disha1202
• pranshugupta54

Poem

🐰 Hopping through the test terrain,
Jest to Vitest, a coding refrain!
Mocks transformed, syntax anew,
Our tests now dance with a vibrant hue.
Refactoring magic, clean and bright! 🧪✨

---

📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between fb48e16 and d71421f.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• src/components/AddPeopleToTag/AddPeopleToTag.spec.tsx (11 hunks)

🧰 Additional context used

📓 Learnings (2)

📓 Common learnings

Learnt from: bitbard3
PR: PalisadoesFoundation/talawa-admin#2588
File: src/components/ChangeLanguageDropdown/ChangeLanguageDropdown.spec.tsx:145-155
Timestamp: 2024-12-02T04:20:11.745Z
Learning: In PRs focused solely on refactoring test cases from Jest to Vitest, avoid suggesting optimizations or changes outside the migration scope.

src/components/AddPeopleToTag/AddPeopleToTag.spec.tsx (1)

Learnt from: bitbard3
PR: PalisadoesFoundation/talawa-admin#2588
File: src/components/ChangeLanguageDropdown/ChangeLanguageDropdown.spec.tsx:145-155
Timestamp: 2024-12-02T04:20:11.745Z
Learning: In PRs focused solely on refactoring test cases from Jest to Vitest, avoid suggesting optimizations or changes outside the migration scope.

🔇 Additional comments (13)

src/components/AddPeopleToTag/AddPeopleToTag.spec.tsx (13)

2-2: Smooth transition from Jest to Vitest imports
Correctly replacing the Jest import with Vitest’s API. No issues spotted.

---

38-41: Successful mock migration to Vitest
Use of vi.mock('react-toastify', ...) is accurate for Vitest.

---

118-125: Properly mocking react-router-dom with Vitest
Mock overriding useParams is implemented correctly with vi.mock(...).

---

128-128: Use of vi.clearAllMocks
Ensures a clean test environment between runs.

---

132-132: Repeated vi.clearAllMocks
Reconfirming that all mocks are reset after each test.

---

136-136: Replacing test with it
Transition to Vitest’s it syntax is appropriate here.

---

146-146: Consistent use of it test naming
Continued alignment with Vitest.

---

156-156: Vitest-compatible test function
No issues changing from test(...) to it(...).

---

184-184: Moving all tests to Vitest’s it
No concerns spotted.

---

217-217: Smooth replacement of Jest test
Again, it(...) fully supported by Vitest.

---

250-250: Infinite scrolling test with Vitest
Maintains the original logic under the new framework.

---

279-279: Toast error test update
Mocked toast calls remain correct under Vitest.

---

294-294: Assigning tag to multiple people
All mocking and assertions use Vitest APIs correctly.

---

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

• Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
  • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
  • Generate unit testing code for this file.
  • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
• Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
  • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
• PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
  • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
  • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
  • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

• @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
• @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
• @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
• @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
• @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
• @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR. (Beta)
• @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
• @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
• @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

• Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
• Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
• Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

Documentation and Community

• Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
• Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
• Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

[github-actions]

Our Pull Request Approval Process

Thanks for contributing!

Testing Your Code

Remember, your PRs won't be reviewed until these criteria are met:

1. We don't merge PRs with poor code quality.
   1. Follow coding best practices such that CodeRabbit.ai approves your PR.
2. We don't merge PRs with failed tests.
   1. When tests fail, click on the Details link to learn more.
   2. Write sufficient tests for your changes (CodeCov Patch Test). Your testing level must be better than the target threshold of the repository
   3. Tests may fail if you edit sensitive files. Ask to add the ignore-sensitive-files-pr label if the edits are necessary.
3. We cannot merge PRs with conflicting files. These must be fixed.

Our policies make our code better.

Reviewers

Do not assign reviewers. Our Queue Monitors will review your PR and assign them.
When your PR has been assigned reviewers contact them to get your code reviewed and approved via:

1. comments in this PR or
2. our slack channel

Reviewing Your Code

Your reviewer(s) will have the following roles:

1. arbitrators of future discussions with other contributors about the validity of your changes
2. point of contact for evaluating the validity of your work
3. person who verifies matching issues by others that should be closed.
4. person who gives general guidance in fixing your tests

CONTRIBUTING.md

Read our CONTRIBUTING.md file. Most importantly:

1. PRs with issues not assigned to you will be closed by the reviewer
2. Fix the first comment in the PR so that each issue listed automatically closes

Other

1. 🎯 Please be considerate of our volunteers' time. Contacting the person who assigned the reviewers is not advised unless they ask for your input. Do not @ the person who did the assignment otherwise.
2. Read the CONTRIBUTING.md file make

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 89.64%. Comparing base (fb48e16) to head (d71421f).
Report is 2 commits behind head on develop-postgres.

Additional details and impacted files

@@                  Coverage Diff                  @@
##           develop-postgres    #3140       +/-   ##
=====================================================
+ Coverage             20.93%   89.64%   +68.70%     
=====================================================
  Files                   301      322       +21     
  Lines                  7685     8451      +766     
  Branches               1678     1841      +163     
=====================================================
+ Hits                   1609     7576     +5967     
+ Misses                 5977      646     -5331     
- Partials                 99      229      +130     

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

[duplixx]

LGTM!!