You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The verification results published from the Rust verifier are extremely streamlined, containing only the interaction ID, success boolean and any mismatches. This is easier to parse than the old verification results, which contained a myriad of data even if the test was successful.
However, interaction IDs are not an easy way of understanding which test failed, as they must then be cross-referenced with a separate document to track them back to the test in code.
To make this easier, could you add the interaction description to the verification results too? This would make it much easier to get a quick understanding of what's broken from the results themselves.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
The verification results format is defined by the Pact broker project. I think it will just ignore additional fields, but I am waiting on conformation of that.
🤖 Great news! We've labeled this issue as smartbear-supported and created a tracking ticket in PactFlow's Jira (PACT-1839). We'll keep work public and post updates here. Meanwhile, feel free to check out our docs. Thanks for your patience!
The verification results published from the Rust verifier are extremely streamlined, containing only the interaction ID, success boolean and any mismatches. This is easier to parse than the old verification results, which contained a myriad of data even if the test was successful.
However, interaction IDs are not an easy way of understanding which test failed, as they must then be cross-referenced with a separate document to track them back to the test in code.
To make this easier, could you add the interaction description to the verification results too? This would make it much easier to get a quick understanding of what's broken from the results themselves.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: