Skip to content
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

test: demonstrate config-file parameter #1047

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 10, 2023

Conversation

MikeMcC399
Copy link
Collaborator

The PR provides two improvements:

  1. The README > Config file section is updated to use an example config filename from current Cypress configurations (Cypress 10.x and later) where the filename by default is either cypress.config.js for JavaScript apps or cypress.config.ts for TypeScript apps, instead of cypress.json for legacy configurations (Cypress 9.x and earlier).

  2. A job is added to the example-config.yml workflow which demonstrates the use of the config-file parameter. This parameter was not previously being tested.

Verification

Run the example-config.yml and examine the new job config-file for successful execution and console output which says:

Using cypress.config-alternate.js config-file

References

add cypress.config-alternate.js to examples/config
use alternate config file in config example
correct config file name in README for non-legacy naming
@cypress-app-bot
Copy link

@MikeMcC399 MikeMcC399 marked this pull request as ready for review October 3, 2023 16:22
@MikeMcC399
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@jennifer-shehane
Copy link
Member

Thanks @MikeMcC399, solid, helpful changes.

@jennifer-shehane jennifer-shehane merged commit 4581de4 into cypress-io:master Oct 10, 2023
72 checks passed
@MikeMcC399 MikeMcC399 deleted the config-file-example branch October 10, 2023 16:59
Copy link

🎉 This PR is included in version 6.6.0 🎉

The release is available on:

Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants