[Suggestion] loki update only unreferenced files about loki HOT 10 CLOSED

I’ll do you one better, add a reference file when there isn’t one when running loki test.

from loki.

Nice! Sounds good, how would that work with the requireReference flag? I guess it'd have to be either or? I could see use cases where you;d prefer options to do it either way

from loki.

On CI or with requireReference it would not update

from loki.

Yeah that's what I was thinking 👍

from loki.

@geraintf Have a look at #96

from loki.

@oblador Just had a play with it and it all seems to work fine. I just had a few thoughts:

• I think the docs should be updated to reflect the new behaviour.
• There's still the chance for someone to accidentally introduce regression by using update.
• The commands I now use for Loki are kinda unclear in terms of the process of how I use it. If I need to add a new reference image I can run a test or update, but update will also modify existing references, update can also be used to approve changes to files as can the approve command. In my head it makes sense to have commands responsible for a single thing e.g. this is the command you use to add reference images, this is the command you use to test and this is the command you use to approve changes.

from loki.

@geraintf There's loki approve to just approve, is that what you're looking for?

from loki.

@oblador I think your change helps (and removes a potential step from the users workflow). I still think there is a way that a user could unknowingly introduce regression.

• User adds a new story/component
• User makes a change to some global styles (which breaks another component)
• User does loki update to add the new file (they could just do loki test but not necessarily)
• Loki adds the new reference images and approves broken tests.

This leads to potential regression going into production.

from loki.

IDK, this issue applies to jest snapshots too? Also you’d see these files both when committing and making a PR.

What is your proposed alternative workflow?

from loki.

Yeah, it's one of the downsides of jest, it relies on developers always looking through every failed snapshot (which might not always happen) but I guess the idea should be to make this as difficult as possible to happen.

I guess I imagine it being something like:

• Use update to add your initial ref images
• Make some changes and/or add new story
• Run test
• Test fails because a) You have a story without a reference image b) A story with a reference image is different
• You run update - this adds any missing reference images (but test would still fail because of the differences)
• You then check that changes in reference images are what you expect, if so you approve

At the moment that line between adding images and approving images is blurred with update also doing the job of approve.

from loki.