-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 10
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Upgrade Storybook to 8.x (next) #2373
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Changes from 14 commits
83cc551
d4991cf
f63d521
6d82915
91ed3aa
508d892
f111d08
e0a5132
c4fa248
6ad522e
93279fa
3f3d310
8875ff2
7060439
a136065
9d18c59
0393fdb
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -1,6 +1,3 @@ | ||
import {resolve, dirname, join} from "path"; | ||
import {mergeConfig} from "vite"; | ||
import turbosnap from "vite-plugin-turbosnap"; | ||
import type {StorybookConfig} from "@storybook/react-vite"; | ||
|
||
const config: StorybookConfig = { | ||
|
@@ -9,52 +6,17 @@ const config: StorybookConfig = { | |
"../__docs__/**/*.mdx", | ||
], | ||
addons: [ | ||
getAbsolutePath("@storybook/addon-essentials"), | ||
getAbsolutePath("@storybook/addon-a11y"), | ||
getAbsolutePath("@storybook/addon-designs"), | ||
getAbsolutePath("@storybook/addon-interactions"), | ||
getAbsolutePath("@storybook/addon-mdx-gfm"), | ||
getAbsolutePath("storybook-addon-pseudo-states"), | ||
"@storybook/addon-essentials", | ||
"@storybook/addon-a11y", | ||
"@storybook/addon-designs", | ||
"storybook-addon-pseudo-states", | ||
"@storybook/experimental-addon-test", | ||
], | ||
staticDirs: ["../static"], | ||
core: { | ||
disableTelemetry: true, | ||
}, | ||
framework: getAbsolutePath("@storybook/react-vite"), | ||
async viteFinal(config, {configType}) { | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. note: I'm moving this to a separate There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. y'all are switching to vitest? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I see, it's just for running storybook tests. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. correct! I'm thinking that we should probably write an ADR if we want to adopt this more widely. Just curious.... I know this is a big change, but I wonder if you have any opinions about switching from Jest to vitest for unit tests? |
||
// Merge custom configuration into the default config | ||
const mergedConfig = mergeConfig(config, { | ||
resolve: { | ||
// Allow us to detect changes from local wonder-blocks packages. | ||
alias: [ | ||
{ | ||
find: /^@khanacademy\/wonder-blocks(-.*)$/, | ||
replacement: resolve( | ||
__dirname, | ||
"../packages/wonder-blocks$1/src", | ||
), | ||
}, | ||
], | ||
}, | ||
}); | ||
|
||
// Add turbosnap to production builds so we can let Chromatic take | ||
// snapshots only to stories associated with the current PR. | ||
if (configType === "PRODUCTION") { | ||
config.plugins?.push( | ||
turbosnap({rootDir: config.root || process.cwd()}), | ||
); | ||
} | ||
Comment on lines
-43
to
-47
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. note: Dropping this as it is no longer needed as a separate package. SB 8 now includes it internally. |
||
|
||
return mergedConfig; | ||
}, | ||
docs: { | ||
autodocs: true, | ||
}, | ||
framework: "@storybook/react-vite", | ||
}; | ||
|
||
export default config; | ||
|
||
function getAbsolutePath(value: string): any { | ||
return dirname(require.resolve(join(value, "package.json"))); | ||
} |
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ | ||
import * as React from "react"; | ||
import wonderBlocksTheme from "./wonder-blocks-theme"; | ||
|
||
import {Decorator} from "@storybook/react"; | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Totally out of the blue and unrelated to this PR, but it looks like you don't have https://github.com/Khan/perseus/blob/main/.eslintrc.js#L220..L236 There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Great point! I'll add this rule in a separate PR. I'll probably wait until WB is in a more "quiet" state to apply the changes :) |
||
import {color} from "@khanacademy/wonder-blocks-tokens"; | ||
import Link from "@khanacademy/wonder-blocks-link"; | ||
import {ThemeSwitcherContext} from "@khanacademy/wonder-blocks-theming"; | ||
|
@@ -95,31 +95,29 @@ const parameters = { | |
}, | ||
}; | ||
|
||
export const decorators = [ | ||
(Story, context) => { | ||
const theme = context.globals.theme; | ||
const enableRenderStateRootDecorator = | ||
context.parameters.enableRenderStateRootDecorator; | ||
|
||
if (enableRenderStateRootDecorator) { | ||
return ( | ||
<RenderStateRoot> | ||
<ThemeSwitcherContext.Provider value={theme}> | ||
<Story /> | ||
</ThemeSwitcherContext.Provider> | ||
</RenderStateRoot> | ||
); | ||
} | ||
const withThemeSwitcher: Decorator = ( | ||
Story, | ||
{globals: {theme}, parameters: {enableRenderStateRootDecorator}}, | ||
) => { | ||
if (enableRenderStateRootDecorator) { | ||
return ( | ||
<ThemeSwitcherContext.Provider value={theme}> | ||
<Story /> | ||
</ThemeSwitcherContext.Provider> | ||
<RenderStateRoot> | ||
<ThemeSwitcherContext.Provider value={theme}> | ||
<Story /> | ||
</ThemeSwitcherContext.Provider> | ||
</RenderStateRoot> | ||
); | ||
}, | ||
]; | ||
} | ||
return ( | ||
<ThemeSwitcherContext.Provider value={theme}> | ||
<Story /> | ||
</ThemeSwitcherContext.Provider> | ||
); | ||
}; | ||
|
||
const preview: Preview = { | ||
parameters, | ||
decorators: [withThemeSwitcher], | ||
globalTypes: { | ||
// Allow the user to select a theme from the toolbar. | ||
theme: { | ||
|
@@ -146,6 +144,8 @@ const preview: Preview = { | |
}, | ||
}, | ||
}, | ||
|
||
tags: ["autodocs"], | ||
}; | ||
|
||
export default preview; |
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. note: This file was generated when I added the experimental addon. More info here: https://storybook.js.org/docs/writing-tests/test-addon#automatic-setup |
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,9 @@ | ||
import { beforeAll } from 'vitest'; | ||
import { setProjectAnnotations } from '@storybook/react'; | ||
import * as projectAnnotations from './preview'; | ||
|
||
// This is an important step to apply the right configuration when testing your stories. | ||
// More info at: https://storybook.js.org/docs/api/portable-stories/portable-stories-vitest#setprojectannotations | ||
const project = setProjectAnnotations([projectAnnotations]); | ||
|
||
beforeAll(project.beforeAll); |
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -332,7 +332,7 @@ export const ControlledMultilpleCombobox: Story = { | |
], | ||
|
||
play: async ({canvasElement}) => { | ||
const canvas = within(canvasElement); | ||
const canvas = within(canvasElement.ownerDocument.body); | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Interesting, this differs from the examples for these There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Ahh yeah, this is useful for when we are using portals. I should add a comment here stating that. |
||
|
||
// Move to second option item | ||
await userEvent.keyboard("{ArrowDown}"); | ||
|
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -83,10 +83,8 @@ Primary.play = async ({canvasElement}) => { | |
|
||
// Focus style with keyboard navigation | ||
await userEvent.tab(); | ||
const computedStyle = getComputedStyle(link, ":focus-visible"); | ||
// rgb(24, 101, 242) is the same as Color.blue. `toBe` doesn't seem to | ||
// compare different color formats, so hex was converted to RGB. | ||
await expect(computedStyle.outline).toBe("rgb(24, 101, 242) solid 1px"); | ||
// rgb(24, 101, 242) is the same as Color.blue | ||
await expect(link).toHaveStyle("outline: rgb(24, 101, 242) solid 1px"); | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. note: This and other similar assertions where changed b/c I got these errors the first time I integrated the new SB test CLI in CI, and made these changes to fix the failures. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. What do we think about tests that check for specific styles? I had started removing jest tests that were asserting styles since it would be visually covered by Chromatic (especially with the "All Variants" stories + pseudostates add on!). Is it helpful to also have these component test checks for styles? Kinda related - In general, when would it be helpful for us to reach for component tests in Storybook? I'm thinking if there's functionality we want to test for that relies on browser behaviour! Curious to see what other think! There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. 100% agree with you. We should move this to "All variants" but the issue is that Once we migrate to CSS pseudoclasses, I'm totally in favor of moving this to visual regression tests instead of interaction tests. |
||
|
||
// Mousedown style | ||
await fireEvent.mouseDown(link); | ||
|
@@ -130,10 +128,8 @@ Secondary.play = async ({canvasElement}) => { | |
|
||
// Focus style with keyboard navigation | ||
await userEvent.tab(); | ||
const computedStyle = getComputedStyle(link, ":focus-visible"); | ||
// rgb(24, 101, 242) is the same as Color.blue. `toBe` doesn't seem to | ||
// compare different color formats, so hex was converted to RGB. | ||
await expect(computedStyle.outline).toBe("rgb(24, 101, 242) solid 1px"); | ||
// rgb(24, 101, 242) is the same as Color.blue. | ||
await expect(link).toHaveStyle("outline: rgb(24, 101, 242) solid 1px"); | ||
|
||
// Mousedown style | ||
await fireEvent.mouseDown(link); | ||
|
@@ -198,10 +194,8 @@ LightPrimary.play = async ({canvasElement}) => { | |
|
||
// Focus style with keyboard navigation | ||
await userEvent.tab(); | ||
const computedStyle = getComputedStyle(link, ":focus-visible"); | ||
// rgb(255, 255, 255) is the same as Color.white. `toBe` doesn't seem to | ||
// compare different color formats, so hex was converted to RGB. | ||
await expect(computedStyle.outline).toBe("rgb(255, 255, 255) solid 1px"); | ||
// rgb(255, 255, 255) is the same as Color.white. | ||
await expect(link).toHaveStyle("outline: rgb(255, 255, 255) solid 1px"); | ||
|
||
// Mousedown style | ||
await fireEvent.mouseDown(link); | ||
|
@@ -492,14 +486,9 @@ Inline.play = async ({canvasElement}) => { | |
|
||
// Focus style with keyboard navigation | ||
await userEvent.tab(); | ||
const primaryComputedStyle = getComputedStyle( | ||
primaryLink, | ||
":focus-visible", | ||
); | ||
// rgb(24, 101, 242) is the same as Color.blue. `toBe` doesn't seem to | ||
// compare different color formats, so hex was converted to RGB. | ||
await expect(primaryComputedStyle.outline).toBe( | ||
"rgb(24, 101, 242) solid 1px", | ||
// rgb(24, 101, 242) is the same as Color.blue. | ||
await expect(primaryLink).toHaveStyle( | ||
"outline: rgb(24, 101, 242) solid 1px", | ||
); | ||
|
||
// Mousedown style | ||
|
@@ -526,14 +515,9 @@ Inline.play = async ({canvasElement}) => { | |
// Focus style with keyboard navigation | ||
await userEvent.tab(); | ||
await userEvent.tab(); | ||
const secondaryComputedStyle = getComputedStyle( | ||
secondaryLink, | ||
":focus-visible", | ||
); | ||
// rgb(24, 101, 242) is the same as Color.blue. `toBe` doesn't seem to | ||
// compare different color formats, so hex was converted to RGB. | ||
await expect(secondaryComputedStyle.outline).toBe( | ||
"rgb(24, 101, 242) solid 1px", | ||
// rgb(24, 101, 242) is the same as Color.blue. | ||
await expect(secondaryLink).toHaveStyle( | ||
"outline: rgb(24, 101, 242) solid 1px", | ||
); | ||
|
||
// Mousedown style | ||
|
@@ -611,10 +595,10 @@ InlineLight.play = async ({canvasElement}) => { | |
|
||
// Focus style with keyboard navigation | ||
await userEvent.tab(); | ||
const computedStyle = getComputedStyle(primaryLink, ":focus-visible"); | ||
// rgb(255, 255, 255) is the same as Color.white. `toBe` doesn't seem to | ||
// compare different color formats, so hex was converted to RGB. | ||
await expect(computedStyle.outline).toBe("rgb(255, 255, 255) solid 1px"); | ||
// rgb(255, 255, 255) is the same as Color.white. | ||
await expect(primaryLink).toHaveStyle( | ||
"outline: rgb(255, 255, 255) solid 1px", | ||
); | ||
|
||
// Mousedown style | ||
await fireEvent.mouseDown(primaryLink); | ||
|
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -82,46 +82,50 @@ export const Default: StoryComponentType = { | |
* The `onChange` prop is optional in case the toggle will | ||
* be wrapped in a larger clickable component. | ||
*/ | ||
export const Controlled: StoryComponentType = () => { | ||
const [checkedOne, setCheckedOne] = React.useState(false); | ||
const [checkedTwo, setCheckedTwo] = React.useState(false); | ||
export const Controlled: StoryComponentType = { | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. note: This component doesn't have any big changes, just moved the code around to support CSF3. |
||
render: function Render() { | ||
const [checkedOne, setCheckedOne] = React.useState(false); | ||
const [checkedTwo, setCheckedTwo] = React.useState(false); | ||
|
||
return ( | ||
<View style={styles.column}> | ||
<Switch checked={checkedOne} onChange={setCheckedOne} /> | ||
|
||
<Switch | ||
testId="test-switch" | ||
aria-label="test switch" | ||
checked={checkedTwo} | ||
onChange={setCheckedTwo} | ||
icon={<PhosphorIcon icon={magnifyingGlassIcon} />} | ||
/> | ||
</View> | ||
); | ||
}; | ||
|
||
Controlled.play = async ({canvasElement}) => { | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. In previous versions of Storybook you had to manually navigate to each story and press "play" to run the tests, right? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Right! and that made it hard to determine when we introduced a regression with these interaction tests. I also added the CI step to ensure that we don't introduce issues in the future. NOTE: Storybook uses the test-runner for this, but it will be replaced by this new test addon. The previous runner used Jest + Playwright, and they wanted to switch to Vitest specially because they can run these tests in browsers as well as in headless mode. This is a new There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. More context here: https://storybook.js.org/blog/storybook-test-sneak-peek/ |
||
const canvas = within(canvasElement); | ||
return ( | ||
<View style={styles.column}> | ||
<Switch checked={checkedOne} onChange={setCheckedOne} /> | ||
<Switch | ||
testId="test-switch" | ||
aria-label="test switch" | ||
checked={checkedTwo} | ||
onChange={setCheckedTwo} | ||
icon={<PhosphorIcon icon={magnifyingGlassIcon} />} | ||
/> | ||
</View> | ||
); | ||
}, | ||
play: async ({canvasElement}) => { | ||
const canvas = within(canvasElement); | ||
|
||
const switchWithIcon = canvas.getByTestId("test-switch"); | ||
const switchInput = canvas.getByRole("switch", {name: "test switch"}); | ||
const switchWithIcon = canvas.getByTestId("test-switch"); | ||
const switchInput = canvas.getByRole("switch", {name: "test switch"}); | ||
|
||
await userEvent.tab(); | ||
await userEvent.tab(); | ||
await userEvent.tab(); | ||
await userEvent.tab(); | ||
|
||
expect(switchWithIcon).toHaveStyle( | ||
"background-color: rgba(33, 36, 44, 0.5)", | ||
); | ||
expect(switchWithIcon).toHaveStyle("outline: 2px solid rgb(24, 101, 242)"); | ||
expect(switchInput).toHaveProperty("checked", false); | ||
expect(switchWithIcon).toHaveStyle( | ||
"background-color: rgba(33, 36, 44, 0.5)", | ||
); | ||
expect(switchWithIcon).toHaveStyle( | ||
"outline: 2px solid rgb(24, 101, 242)", | ||
); | ||
expect(switchInput).toHaveProperty("checked", false); | ||
|
||
await userEvent.click(switchWithIcon); | ||
// Wait for animations to finish | ||
await new Promise((resolve) => setTimeout(resolve, 150)); | ||
await userEvent.click(switchWithIcon); | ||
// Wait for animations to finish | ||
await new Promise((resolve) => setTimeout(resolve, 150)); | ||
|
||
expect(switchInput).toHaveProperty("checked", true); | ||
expect(switchWithIcon).toHaveStyle("background-color: rgb(24, 101, 242)"); | ||
expect(switchInput).toHaveProperty("checked", true); | ||
expect(switchWithIcon).toHaveStyle( | ||
"background-color: rgb(24, 101, 242)", | ||
); | ||
}, | ||
}; | ||
|
||
/** | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Storybook upgrades always want to drop this back in. I finally searched when it's needed. Apparently in Yarn PnP situations module resolution can fail without this. Good to know we can remove this in Perseus too then.
https://storybook.js.org/docs/faq#how-do-i-fix-module-resolution-in-special-environments
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
oh I see, thanks for the context.