ipAsset integration tests - edge and complex cases
#417
Conversation
bpolania
requested review from
AndyBoWu,
DonFungible,
LeoHChen,
allenchuang,
edisonz0718 and
jacob-tucker
as code owners
| let parentIpId: Hex; | ||
|
|
||
| before(async () => { | ||
| client = getStoryClient(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
isn't this already created in the outer describe?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No. I needed to reset the scope to force some errors.
| const res = await client.license.registerNonComSocialRemixingPIL({ | ||
| txOptions: { waitForTransaction: true }, | ||
| }); | ||
| noCommercialLicenseTermsId = res.licenseTermsId!; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
we should try to reuse items like this and ips when possible to reduce the run time of our integration tests.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ideally, we should try, but in some cases, since we are trying multiple configurations, they need to be reset anyway. In other cases, they are out of scope.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
in this case, shouldn't noCommercialLicenseTermsId be the same ID as the one you have in the outer scope? Since the terms are the same, the POC should return the same license id i believe. So we can avoid doing multical rpc calls here just to fetch the same id.
| tokenId: tokenId!, | ||
| txOptions: { waitForTransaction: true }, | ||
| }); | ||
| parentIpId = parentIpResponse.ipId!; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
we can probably reuse the parent ip created earlier
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The previous parentIpId is out of scope, i.e., not in the same describe
There was a problem hiding this comment.
we do have a parentIpId in the most outer scope IP Asset Functions. I understand if we need a brand new IP with a clean state. But if we don't or can avoid it, then lets try to reuse.
Description
This PR adds edge cases and more complex tests to the
ipAssetmodule integration tests.