feat(skin): replace vivo-new with vivo, and add vivo-evolution#1608
feat(skin): replace vivo-new with vivo, and add vivo-evolution#1608brtbrt wants to merge 3 commits into
Conversation
|
Size stats
|
| id: 'components-carousels-carousel--default', | ||
| device: 'MOBILE_IOS', | ||
| skin: VIVO_NEW_SKIN, | ||
| skin: VIVO_SKIN, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
for these kind of tests: do we want to add vivo-evolution too already?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
mmm, supporting 2 test for vivo maybe is too much? I dont want to die drowned between screenshots
| import {openStoryPage, screen} from '../test-utils'; | ||
|
|
||
| const SKINS = ['Movistar', 'O2', 'Vivo-new', 'Telefonica', 'Blau', 'O2-new', 'Tu', 'Esimflag'] as const; | ||
| const SKINS = ['Movistar', 'O2', 'Vivo', 'Telefonica', 'Blau', 'O2-new', 'Tu', 'Esimflag'] as const; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
same here: do we add vivo-evolution already?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
aaand same here. do we add vivo-evolution too. WDYT? I see it a good add
| skinName === VIVO_SKIN ? ( | ||
| <VivoLogo style={{width: '10%', minWidth: 24, maxWidth: 48}} /> | ||
| ) : skinName === VIVO_NEW_SKIN ? ( | ||
| skinName === VIVO_SKIN || skinName === VIVO_EVOLUTION_SKIN ? ( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
double checking this: we are ok with this right?
|
Deploy preview for mistica-web ready!
Deployed with vercel-action |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
why these screenshots are new? 🤔
I could understand if the name of the screenshots include "evolution" but is not the case
There was a problem hiding this comment.
because we've just passed from vivo-new to be vivo, and vivo used to be different right?
| id: 'components-carousels-carousel--default', | ||
| device: 'MOBILE_IOS', | ||
| skin: VIVO_NEW_SKIN, | ||
| skin: VIVO_SKIN, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
mmm, supporting 2 test for vivo maybe is too much? I dont want to die drowned between screenshots
There was a problem hiding this comment.
wea have run tests using two Vivo models... and other tests without this approach... I feel like there are quite a few inconsistencies here.
wdyt? maybe is a task for the future
| skinName === VIVO_SKIN ? ( | ||
| <VivoLogo style={{width: '10%', minWidth: 24, maxWidth: 48}} /> | ||
| ) : skinName === VIVO_NEW_SKIN ? ( | ||
| skinName === VIVO_SKIN || skinName === VIVO_EVOLUTION_SKIN ? ( |
|
Accessibility report ℹ️ You can run this locally by executing |
Closes #1595. Part of #626 — Major release plan 17.0.0.
Changes
vivo-newskin tovivo(replacing the old one)vivo-evolutionas a copy of the currentvivo-newvalues, ready to evolve independently after the major releaseStack position — 1 of 9
This PR is the first in the stack and targets
masterdirectly.For the full merge strategy, see #626. Do not merge out of order.