feat(tests): add extractHash support in test-infra

[hemal7735]

What kind of change does this PR introduce?

This PR adds support for extracting hash after running test. Jest is already doing it. We are trying to mimic it here, for our needs.
Did you add tests for your changes? Yes

If relevant, did you update the documentation? NA

Summary

This PR tries to address the feature-request issue #672
Closes #672

Does this PR introduce a breaking change? No

[ematipico]

The extractSummary has to work on the output given by webpack, not jest.

I think there's been some confusion/misunderstanding about what this function should do.

The input of the function will be the stdout of a generic webpack output.
The function will extract information that we want.

I left some comments here #672 where I explain better the issue. Let me know if you have any questions

[hemal7735]

👍 thanks, @ematipico for the clarification. I will revisit the problem here.

[hemal7735]

I've added support for extractHash. I'm kinda confused regarding the return value of extractSummary functionality. Implementation purely depends upon what info we want to extract to validate.
Can you folks guide me here?

[ematipico]

Yes, the original PR lacks of spec and I do apologize for that.

As extract summary we can do basically what that function I pointed out does.

We should strip out any timestamp, hash and information that is dynamic.

[hemal7735]

We should strip out any timestamp, hash and information that is dynamic.

The existing removeTimeStrings function is already doing it. So do we want to make it parameterized so that it gets only the info we passed?
It would really help me if I can get some examples.

PR contains extractHash functionality.

[ematipico]

Yes it already does that but it's not optimal, it can have parameters for instance.
Also, this function is applied to the source of the stdout and we do want to change that. We would want to use this function in the test itself, not before.

We can do this change later. In this PR we can do copy paste for now and doing another PR where we change all the tests.

[hemal7735]

@ematipico any thoughts over extractHash functionality presented in the PR?

[ematipico]

It would be nice to have some test on some mock string, to make sure it will work

[hemal7735]

@ematipico added relevant tests

[ematipico]

Thanks!

[evenstensberg]

Left some questions :)

[webpack-bot]

@hemal7735 Thanks for your update.

I labeled the Pull Request so reviewers will review it again.

@evenstensberg Please review the new changes.

[webpack-bot]

Thank you for your pull request! The most important CI builds succeeded, we’ll review the pull request soon.

[evenstensberg]

Can you add JSDocs for the rest of the functions getting exported? looking good, a few things left!

[hemal7735]

@evenstensberg I would love to do that, however not here, in the separate PR. 💯
I believe each PR should have single reversible logical change, which can define what is done in the PR. This was regarding adding extractHash support, so we should stick to it.
I can create an issue to track this.
Again, these are my thoughts. I would leave it up to the rest of the community. 😄

[ematipico]

@evenstensberg: I think @hemal7735 he's right. That's not part of the scope of the PR. He did a great job here!

[evenstensberg]

lgtm here