Skip to content

Conversation

@Tucchhaa
Copy link
Contributor

@Tucchhaa Tucchhaa commented Dec 5, 2025

No description provided.

@Tucchhaa Tucchhaa self-assigned this Dec 5, 2025
@Tucchhaa Tucchhaa marked this pull request as ready for review December 9, 2025 03:58
@Tucchhaa Tucchhaa requested a review from a team as a code owner December 9, 2025 03:58
Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings December 9, 2025 03:58
Copy link
Contributor

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull request overview

This PR continues the reimplementation of legacy QUnit tests for the Scheduler appointment form as Jest tests (Part 2). It adds additional test coverage for editing recurring appointments, resource field expressions, resource editor types, and resource dataSource loading behavior.

Key Changes:

  • Added 4 new tests covering recurring appointment editing, resource field handling, and resource editor types
  • Added getEditAppointmentButton() helper method to PopupModel for accessing the "Edit appointment" button
  • Renamed test suite from "Timezones" to "Timezone Editors" for better clarity

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated 1 comment.

File Description
packages/devextreme/js/__internal/scheduler/appointment_popup/appointment_popup.test.ts Added 4 new tests: single appointment from series editing, resource field expression validation, resource editor type verification (TagBox vs SelectBox), and resource dataSource loading optimization test
packages/devextreme/js/__internal/scheduler/tests/mock/model/popup.ts Added getEditAppointmentButton() helper method following the same pattern as getEditSeriesButton()

@Tucchhaa Tucchhaa merged commit ecd0692 into DevExpress:25_2 Dec 9, 2025
100 of 103 checks passed
@Tucchhaa Tucchhaa deleted the reimplement_qunit_2_25_2 branch December 9, 2025 11:32
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants