Page Comparison

• Github alerts when there are known vulnerabilities in a repository... In some cases these have gone ignored for quite some time.
  • Should the TC mandate that these be addressed in a "timely" manner?  Answer - No. Rely on Security Team's process.
  • Leave it up to the security team to decide on a case-by-case basis?
• Craig McNally will raise for discussion at the next Security Team meeting (Friday)
  • Review and ensure JIRAs exist for all existing vulnerabilities reported by github
  • Triage/prioritize each and assign to teams as needed.
  • Investigate how to manage this better going forward - is there some automated way to get these into JIRA?

Mike Gorrell

Discuss the need for investigation/review of our UI testing strategy and recommendations/requirements based on current tech/framework and state of coverage, level of effort, etc.

• Broadly, there are two types of UI tests: integration tests (full-stack) that operate against a production UI build backed by a live backend, and functional or unit tests (UI-only) that operate against a mocked backend.
  
  • integration tests are written in NightmareJS; it is not currently maintained and uses an outdated version of the Electron browser
  • unit tests are mostly written in BigTest v1, a framework that is now officially deprecated
• We have substantial investment in both Nightmare and BigTest, but given their lack of maintenance, we are a bit stuck. 
• Additional unit testing challenges we face regardless of the framework:
  • We don't have a good way to manage mocks for unit tests in a way that keeps them in sync with backend changes.
  • We don't have a good way to manage mocks for interfaces in a single place when multiple UI apps rely on the same interface. Currently, we maintain separate copies of mocks in separate UI repositories. 

Two real questions for now:

1) Should we review the technology, process and expectations (80%) for creation Unit tests. Consensus is yes. We'll review the requirements for both UI and backendAnton Emelianov (Deactivated)volunteers to kick this effort off. Will follow up in 3 weeks.

2) What do we do with modules that don't meet the test strategy requirements?

• Note that MARCcat is being taken up by @Cult and Scanbit - the expectations are that they'll have 80% coverage for Unit tests.
• Any module that has less than 80% needs to have "special exception" noted by Tech Council in order to be included in community builds.
• We need to have a process to document that special exception.
• UI-Courses had a "grandfathered" special exception because we thought tests were coming in Q2. It will not be included in the community releases in Q3 unless its code coverage meets our standards.