This is the default anyway when using ->with(). The test code
becomes so much more readable without this, I would like to
argue. Let it just say "with these values".
Because of the way I split my changes into multiple patches
there are a few other changes in this patch I could not split,
e.g. removing unnecessary ->any(). This is the default anyway
and doesn't make the test more specific.
Change-Id: I34990799fa9258ba8dc64c7e78ec43f7903b7681
Ended up using
grep -Prl '\->setMethods\(' . | xargs sed -r -i 's/setMethods\(/onlyMethods\(/g'
special-casing setMethods( null ) -> onlyMethods( [] )
and then manual fix of failing test (from PS2 onwards).
Bug: T278010
Change-Id: I012dca7ae774bb430c1c44d50991ba0b633353f1
Specifically, remove the conditional processing of
ContentModelChangeConstraint and ChangeTagsConstraint in
favor of early returns within the constraints
Bug: T157658
Change-Id: I377c0e3d9611d2da0a2d0f9bca055d65a1bec7e6
Add
- ContentModelChangeConstraint
- EditRightConstraint
- ImageRedirectConstraint
- ReadOnlyConstraint
- UserBlockConstraint
- UserRateLimitConstraint
Additionally:
- Split EditPageTest into a separate file for
all of the constraints being tested
- Add a helper EditConstraintTestTrait
- Add debug logging for EditConstraintRunner for
the result of each constraint
- Changed the order of some of the checks, which
may result in a different failure code if multiple
checks were going to fail, but shouldn't change the
overall result of whether an edit fails or not.
Bug: T157658
Change-Id: Ib8f8b62b9928544e5559c96d82bf850dd8cf9b05
