Hi team. I’m new to Pact and contract testing in general. I’m working on a POC with Pactflow and I seem to have a chicken and egg dilemma with

can-i-deploy

in CI when a change is made in the contract to an existing field’s data type/expected value. For example: • Verified contract between consumer (

main

branch) & provider (

main

branch) has JSON response body field

age

as an integer • Consumer team publishes revised contract (

feature-age

branch) to update

age

to be a string. Contract for

feature-age

branch has status “Unverified” so

can-i-deploy

check in CI fails for no verified contract w/ provider. Pull request is blocked from merging to

main

due to failing check. • Provider team implements change to

age

field changing it from integer to string in a feature branch and creates a pull request. Pull request

can-i-deploy

CI check fails verification because latest version of

main

branch in the consumer still has

age

as an integer (consumer PR is blocked from merging). In this situation, neither the provider nor the consumer can merge PRs to implement the data type change to an existing field. I’d like to prevent a consumer from merging to

main

if a contract is unverified or failing when comparing to its provider(s)

main

branches. And vice versa for providers.

can-i-deploy

seems to fit the bill for that as a CI check when adding or removing fields, but when I try to change the data type/expected value for a field, I hit this wall. Any guidance would be appreciated!

Hi, We are onboarding pact consumer driven contract testing in our micro-services architecture. Since we have just started with the process, I have a basic question on integrating pact with our CI/CD pipelines. I have a consumer C1 having a contract with provider P1, publishing pact for the first time to the pact broker. If I’m configuring contract_requiring_verification_published web hook, this will trigger the pact verification and publish the results to pact broker. I haven’t yet recorded the provider deployment in pact broker though. Hence in the consumer pipeline, if I configure can-i-deploy after publishing pact this will fail. Unless I trigger a deployment for my provider, record deployment which is configured after deployment is not going to record the provider version and environment in pact broker. How to automate this process for the consumer build to work. Can you help me with this?

Hello, I get the following (false negative) validation error:

Allen Ayala [11:13 AM] Good morning, I’m trying to pull some reports from the PactFlow DB, and I wanted to figure out whether a participant is doing CDC or BDC. Is there a way to check for this on the DB?

Hi, As of Friday morning we're getting a large amount of failures in contract comparison for APIs that we haven't changed. The main types we are seeing are • Request body is incompatible with the request body schema in the spec file: must be object • Request content type header is not defined but spec specifies mime-types to consume • Response Content-Type header is defined but the spec does not specify any mime-types to produce Would anyone be able to help with this please? It really doesn't look to me like we've actually broken our contracts, so I'm wondering if it's a Pact bug.

Hi All, Can someone tell me if PactFlow support "Mock-Data Testing"?

Hi, I am new to Pactflow and doing a POC on contract based testing. I want to understand a little more about how pact verification with provider works for certain use cases. Lets say, there is an api like

GET /v1/tickets?user_id=123

which returns list of tickets a user had purchased. Sample response as follows

{
    "tickets": [
        { upcoming_ticket1 },
        { upcoming_ticket2 },
        { upcoming_ticket3 },
        { expired_ticket1 },
        { expired_ticket2 }
    ],
    page: 1,
    page_size: 5
}

Now, I want to have following 3 UI test cases. 1. TestUserWithOnlyExpiredTickets 2. TestUserWithBothUpcomingAndTickets 3. TestUserWithOnlyUpcomingTickets While I can create the request/response pairs for these 3 cases that makes the api consumers to test with those contracts, how would the provider validation work for these 3 cases. As I understand from some of the demo videos, the pact broker validates the contract with actual provider. In these 3 examples of contracts, how does the pact broker knows it has to create user with specific state such as the number of tickets with expired/active flag or how do I write the pact to instruct the pact broker to create the users with a given state ? Is there an example that I could refer ?

📣 New webinar alert: Accelerating Deployment Velocity: The Power of Bi-Directional Contract Testing 🔴 Recording available here 👉 https://smartbear.wistia.com/medias/xtnv0qroo3 Description From the beginning, PactFlow was closely and solely aligned to the popular Open-Source Pact framework facilitating consumer driven contract testing. With no signs of slowing, this practice is a proven way to increase developer confidence, deploy faster, reduce issues in production and decrease testing costs. However, like most development practices, there’s no silver bullet and some users experience barriers to scaling up for success. As a team who enjoy drinking our own champagne—and being as close to the Pact community as we are—we were aware of some of the pains and sought a methodology and framework to solve some challenges. So, we expanded the breadth of contract testing capabilities beyond the popular Pact framework, to enable new modes of contract capture and compliance, a broader set of use cases, and a simplified developer experience. Join us for this informative webinar to: • Understand when to choose consumer-driven or bi-directional contract testing • See the value and ROI of contract testing faster • Learn how bi-directional contract testing lowers the barriers • Ask any questions you have • See a demo

I just started playing with pactflow cli but while trying to publish a contract to our broker, I get the following error:

./pact/bin/pactflow publish-provider-contract ./<contract>.json --broker-base-url https://<url>.<http://pactflow.io/|pactflow.io/> --provider "<provider>" --provider-app-version 0.0.1
Error making request to https://<url>.<http://pactflow.io/provider-contracts/provider/<provider>/publish|pactflow.io/provider-contracts/provider/<provider>/publish> status=400 {"errors":{"_body.contract.contentType":["is missing"]}}

provider
    .given("a test")
    .uponReceiving("a request")
    .withRequest({
      method: "GET",
      path: "/endpoint",
      headers: { 'Content-Type': 'application/json' }
    })
    .willRespondWith({
      body: like(jsonResponse),
      status: 200,
      headers: { 'Content-Type': 'application/json', 'Accept': 'application/json' }
    });

any idea what am I missing?

Hi All, In our pact scenario we have multiple services and one of them (ServiceC) is both provider and consumer. We keep running into the following error when trying to run the pipeline for ServiceC: The cross contract comparison between the pact for the version of ServiceA currently in dev (610554d ******************) and the oas for version b461002***************** of ServiceC is currently being executed. Enable polling for the can-i-deploy command to retry until all results are available. See https://docs.pactflow.io/docs/cid-polling-bdc for details. ##[error]PowerShell exited with code '1'. Usually the error resolves itself by re-running the pipeline for ServiceC without running any other pipeline. For example last time this error happened, we had the following situation in Pact logs: Computer says no ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ CONSUMER |C.VERSION | PROVIDER | P.VERSION | SUCCESS? | RESULT# -----------------------|----------|-----------------------|------------|----------|-------- ServiceA | 610554d... | ServiceC | b461002... | ??? | ServiceC | b461002... | ServiceB | 3bce4a0... | true | 1 ServiceC | b461002... | ServiceD | 3bce4a0... | true | 2 After the re-run of ServiceC pipeline can-i-deploy succeeded and we had the following situation in Pact logs: Computer says yes \o/ CONSUMER |C.VERSION | PROVIDER | P.VERSION | SUCCESS? | RESULT# -----------------------|----------|-----------------------|------------|----------|-------- Admin | 610554d... | ServiceC | b461002... | true | 1 ServiceC | b461002... | ServiceB | 3bce4a0... | true | 2 ServiceC | b461002... | ServiceD | 3bce4a0... | true | 3 Any hints what causes this or how we can debug it?

Hi, We have a contract with another team as follows: { "TypeOfPayload": "A", "Details": [ { "ID": "000-AAZ", "Quantity": "1", "HashTags": [ "aa-000" ], "SubIds": [ "aaa-zzzz-700000000" ] } ] } Because the message provider breaks the contracts too often, which breaks our system as well, so we really want to use Pactflow to verify the following contracts: 1. The value for "TypeOfPayload" should either be "A", "B", or "D". 2. The "Quantity" value should match the count of SubIds array elements. 3. If the "TypeOfPayload" value is "B", then "HashTags" should not be null or empty. Can we use Pactflow to create the contract on the broker for the message provider to verify?

P.S. our message provider and consumer are using Kafka to communicate

@Ruth has left the channel

Hello there! Consumer Messaging Pact Test failing with below error "Expected property Date with a length of 24, but has a length of 20, differs near Z" what's observed is... failing only when the date milliseconds are all zeros such as... "2023-10-31T063424.000Z"

Hi We are trying to run this test with PactNet, as the following screenshot. When we put breakpoints and run the codes in the debugging mode, we can see that both the matcher and deserialized json have the proper value for the "Id" property, which is not null. But the result of the test keeps giving us this error message:  PactNet.Exceptions.PactMessageConsumerVerificationException : The message could not be verified by the consumer handler ---- Expected property events[0].Items[0].locations[0].Ids not to be <null>.

By any chance you would know why this error happens?

We find that it's because the property is "Id" in our json text, but it's "Ids" in our model. We use [JsonProperty("Id")] to deserialize it.

But we cannot change this logic, can we make it work by adding any pactflow setting?

The link to

Publishing

under Pact JS here is broken https://docs.pact.io/getting_started/sharing_pacts#language-support Where is the documentation for publishing to pactflow in Pact JS?

Another broker question - I successfully published my first pact, but I found a mistake. I've since fixed the test, and it is correctly making the new contract, but when I go to publish, the older version is overwriting the new version. I've updated the consumer app version and the tag, and am getting this message:

Pact successfully published for flow-controller version v7 and provider normalizer.
  View the published pact at <https://my-company.pactflow.io/pacts/provider/normalizer/consumer/flow-controller/version/v7>
  Events detected: contract_published, contract_content_changed (first time any pact published for this consumer with consumer version tagged v7)

Hi We have experienced a problem while implementing a pact test from consumer side. Although our C#.Net Object has all properties in PascalCase, And when our pact test execution is complete, it converts all the properties into camel case if the CamelCasePropertyNamesContractResolver is used. However, this conversion does not apply to C# Anonymous Types. For instance: We have a property public object BusinessRules { get; set; } Matcher code BusinessRules = Match.Type(new { Comments = Match.Type("This is a comment"), }) For some reason only businessRules is properly converted into camelcase. But Comments remain in Pascal case. Any Specific reason why the CamelCasePropertyNamesContractResolver is not applied to Anonymous Types #pact-net

Hi, curious question. We have created a consumer test to test how we handle error 500 by the provider. However, a http 500 is not defined in the openapi spec (see pic). Thinking about it, I guess that makes sense? a 500 is usually an unexpected exception. So defining a http 500 response in your openapi implies that you expect the unexpected? We are testing this using bi-directional (hence the #pactflow channel), but I think the problem persists in consumer-driven too. Given we give the provider a contract which expects a 500 response, how would the provider even simulate an exception for that test? Are there any thoughts on covering http 500 cases?

Another question: pactflow provides webhooks primarily for triggering provider pipelines when using consumer-driven testing. In the case of bidirectional, are there any webhooks available that we could use for example posting verification results to slack?

Hi, I am trying to use the pactflow stubs, however when making a GET request to my stub URL, I receive the following error:

Internal Server Error. An error has occurred. The details have been logged with the reference XXXXXXXXX

Does anyone know why this could be, or how I find further information linked to the reference number the response gave me?

Hi all, PactFlow provides version control for contracts. CURRENTLY : Our CICD jobs have a dynamic variable for version that changes every time the job is run. But if we don't have any new changes in our contract, it is still showing as a new version in Pact Broker history since the version gets changed every time. The issue we are facing is : We do not want to publish new versions of contract when there are no changes. How can we publish the pact only when there is actual changes in the contract? FYI @John Joel

Hi all, Our org is running into an issue with CICD implementation. Specifically when a dev updates a provider and breaks consumers. How is the dev supposed to get the pipeline into a green state in order to merge into main? Currently we have the can-i-merge check happening which fails as the current dev work has broken the pact. So dev finds consumers and updates them, but CICD can-i-merge check still fails since provider work is on a feature branch and consumer update is on a feature branch, not main. We’re now soft-locked from introducing any change. I read a bit about WIP pacts and pendingpacts, However im not seeing where those settings are to be set or really any example using them. Were utilizing all our pact commands with Cypress & pact-broker-cli. Any help is appreciated, Thanks!

For once I don't have any issues to report, just wanted to say that, as of now, we have both publication and verification fully automated in our CI system for our first two services! Special thanks to both @Matt (pactflow.io / pact-js / pact-go) and @Yousaf Nabi (pactflow.io), who were instrumental in working through the myriad of issues I faced while implementing this.

@Gazal Gafoor has left the channel

Hi all, We observed a peculiar behavior in PactFlow and want to understand it. In the screenshot given below, all 4 contracts are the same just the version is different as we are using $*CI_COMMIT_SHA* in our pipelines. Our expectation here is : 1. Change in contract -> A new contract is shown in integration. 2. Change in version only -> Version of the existing contract gets updated. ISSUE : We are seeing 4 contracts in the integration even though the contracts are exactly the same.

Hello. A question about stubs. If I have an interaction that requires an auth header. How do I call the stub generated from this where the auth header I provide to access my Pactflow tenant doesn't conflict with the stub. For example, I'm calling for a stub on my PactFlow server but I get an error response like:

{
  "message": "No interaction found for POST some/request/requiring/auth",
  "interaction_diffs": [
    {
      "description": "some description",
      "provider_state": "some provider stage",
      "headers": {
        "Authorization": {
          "EXPECTED": "Bearer 1234",
          "ACTUAL": "Bearer {{PACTFLOW_API_KEY}}"
        }
      }
    }
  ]
}