Update Selenium to 4.27.0 +semver:feature #98
Conversation
WalkthroughThe pull request primarily updates the Changes
Possibly related PRs
Suggested labels
Poem
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
pom.xml (1)
Line range hint
1-282: Ensure comprehensive testing of all updatesGiven the multiple version updates in this PR:
- Run the full test suite to verify no regressions
- Test the build process end-to-end
- Consider splitting major version updates (like Selenium) into separate PRs for better isolation of changes
Consider adding a GitHub Actions workflow to automatically verify dependency compatibility and security advisories.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
pom.xml(9 hunks)src/test/java/tests/visualization/FormDumpTests.java(1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (5)
src/test/java/tests/visualization/FormDumpTests.java (1)
71-73: LGTM! Consider adding a clarifying comment.
The sequence change is logical - saving the dump before hovering ensures we capture the initial state for comparison. This makes the test more reliable and clearer in its intent.
Consider adding a comment to explain this sequence dependency:
form.dump().save("Non-zero diff");
+// Hover must occur after saving the dump to ensure we capture the visual difference
form.hoverAvatar();
form.waitUntilPresent();Since this is part of a Selenium upgrade, let's verify the test behavior:
✅ Verification successful
Let me gather more information about the test class and its dependencies to better understand the context.
Let me check the HoversForm class implementation and related test files to understand the full context.
Let me check the HoversForm implementation to understand the hover behavior.
Based on the implementation details from HoversForm.java, I can now generate the final response.
The sequence change is correct and necessary
The implementation shows that hoverAvatar() performs a clickAndHold action that waits for a hidden element to be displayed, which would definitely affect the visual state. The current sequence correctly captures the baseline state before applying the hover action.
Looking at the implementation:
hoverAvatar()performs a complex action (moveToElement + clickAndHold)- It waits for a hidden element to become displayed
- These visual changes are exactly what the test aims to detect
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check test history across Selenium versions to understand if this is a version-specific change
# Look for previous changes to this test method
git log -L '/shouldBePossibleToCompareWithDumpWithCustomNameWhenDifferenceIsNotZero/,/^ }/:src/test/java/tests/visualization/FormDumpTests.java'
# Check for related Selenium issues/discussions
gh api graphql -f query='
{
search(query: "repo:SeleniumHQ/selenium hover action changes", type: ISSUE, first: 5) {
nodes {
... on Issue {
title
url
state
createdAt
}
}
}
}'
Length of output: 1360
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the Form class implementation to understand hover and dump behavior
ast-grep --pattern 'class Form {
$$$
hoverAvatar($$$) {
$$$
}
$$$
}'
# Look for other similar test methods in the same class
rg -B2 -A2 "form\.hoverAvatar\(\)" src/test/java/tests/visualization/FormDumpTests.java
# Check for other test classes using similar patterns
rg "hoverAvatar.*dump" --type java
Length of output: 486
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Find and check HoversForm class implementation
fd -e java HoversForm
# Look for the dump implementation
ast-grep --pattern 'class $_ {
$$$
dump() {
$$$
}
$$$
}'
# Check for other test methods in FormDumpTests
rg -A 5 "class FormDumpTests" src/test/java/tests/visualization/FormDumpTests.java
Length of output: 430
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check HoversForm implementation
cat src/test/java/theinternet/HoversForm.java
# Look for related test files that might provide more context
rg -l "HoversForm" --type java
# Check for any dump-related utility classes
fd -e java -e kt dump
Length of output: 4500
pom.xml (4)
20-20: Verify log4j version compatibility and security
The log4j update to 2.24.2 is a minor version change. Let's verify its security status and compatibility.
✅ Verification successful
Log4j 2.24.2 version is secure and compatible
The version 2.24.2 of Log4j is not affected by any known vulnerabilities. The security scan shows that all reported vulnerabilities affect much older versions:
- Critical vulnerability (remote code injection) affects versions < 2.3.1
- Low severity issues (SMTP appender) affect versions < 2.13.2
- High severity DoS vulnerability only affects Log4j 1.x versions
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check for security advisories for log4j
gh api graphql -f query='
{
securityVulnerabilities(first: 5, ecosystem: MAVEN, package: "org.apache.logging.log4j:log4j-core") {
nodes {
advisory {
summary
severity
publishedAt
}
vulnerableVersionRange
firstPatchedVersion {
identifier
}
}
}
}'
Length of output: 1562
134-134: Document Selenium 4.27.0 upgrade impact
The Selenium upgrade to 4.27.0 is a feature version update that might include breaking changes. Please:
- Document any breaking changes from the changelog
- Update the project's documentation if needed
- Verify compatibility with java-client 9.3.0
✅ Verification successful
Selenium 4.27.0 upgrade appears safe to proceed
Based on the codebase analysis:
- The project extensively uses Selenium's core APIs (
findElement,findElements) but doesn't use any deprecated methods likegetCapabilities(). - The usage patterns align with Selenium 4.x stable APIs, focusing on standard WebElement interactions.
- The project follows a clean abstraction layer through
aquality.selenium.corewhich isolates direct Selenium dependencies.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for Selenium-dependent test files that might need updates
echo "Searching for Selenium usage patterns that might need updates..."
rg -l "import org.openqa.selenium" --type java
# Check for potential breaking changes in test files
echo "Checking for common breaking changes patterns..."
rg "getCapabilities\(\)" --type java
rg "findElement" --type java
Length of output: 26376
Line range hint 137-141: Verify Appium java-client compatibility
Please verify that java-client 9.3.0 is compatible with Selenium 4.27.0 to avoid any runtime issues.
✅ Verification successful
Appium java-client 9.3.0 is compatible with Selenium 4.27.0
The codebase shows proper integration between Appium and Selenium:
- WindowsApplication.java uses
WindowsDriverandWindowsOptionsfrom java-client 9.3.0 - CalculatorWindow.java uses
AppiumByalongside Selenium'sBy - Both libraries are used in a compatible way with no conflicting imports or deprecated usage patterns
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for Appium-specific test files that might need updates
echo "Searching for Appium usage patterns..."
rg -l "import io.appium" --type java
Length of output: 259
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the actual Appium usage in test files
echo "Checking Appium usage in WindowsApplication.java..."
rg -A 5 "import io.appium" src/test/java/tests/applications/windowsApp/WindowsApplication.java
echo -e "\nChecking Appium usage in CalculatorWindow.java..."
rg -A 5 "import io.appium" src/test/java/tests/applications/windowsApp/CalculatorWindow.java
# Check for Selenium version in pom.xml
echo -e "\nChecking Selenium version..."
rg "selenium-java" -A 2 pom.xml
Length of output: 1066
192-192: Review significant plugin version jumps
The following plugins have significant version increases:
- maven-surefire-plugin: 3.2.5 -> 3.5.2
- maven-javadoc-plugin: 3.6.3 -> 3.11.1
Please verify:
- No breaking changes in build configuration
- Test execution behavior remains consistent
- Javadoc generation still works as expected
Also applies to: 234-234
✅ Verification successful
Plugin version updates appear safe to proceed
Both plugins have minimal, standard configurations that are compatible with the new versions:
-
maven-surefire-plugin (3.5.2):
- Uses standard configuration for UTF-8 encoding, test suite file, and fork control
- No deprecated or removed features used
-
maven-javadoc-plugin (3.11.1):
- Simple configuration with Java 11 source level
- Standard jar goal execution
- No deprecated features or complex options used
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check for surefire and javadoc plugin configurations
echo "Checking for custom surefire configurations..."
rg "<plugin>.*?<artifactId>maven-surefire-plugin.*?</plugin>" -U --multiline --type xml
echo "Checking for custom javadoc configurations..."
rg "<plugin>.*?<artifactId>maven-javadoc-plugin.*?</plugin>" -U --multiline --type xml
Length of output: 382
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a different approach to find plugin configurations
echo "Checking maven-surefire-plugin configuration..."
cat pom.xml | grep -A 10 -B 2 "maven-surefire-plugin"
echo -e "\nChecking maven-javadoc-plugin configuration..."
cat pom.xml | grep -A 10 -B 2 "maven-javadoc-plugin"
echo -e "\nChecking if there are any custom configurations in profiles..."
cat pom.xml | grep -A 20 "<profile>" | grep -B 20 "</profile>" | grep -A 5 -B 5 "plugin"
Length of output: 1643
|
PR Details
Related Issue Link:
How Has This Been Tested
Checklist