fix(e2e-tests): remove flaky navigation breadcrumb assertions from parameterized-routes tests#20202
fix(e2e-tests): remove flaky navigation breadcrumb assertions from parameterized-routes tests#20202
Conversation
…rameterized-routes tests Remove unreliable navigation breadcrumb assertions from parameterized-routes E2E tests across all Next.js versions (13, 14, 15, 16, 16-bun, 16-cf-workers). These tests verify route parameterization, not breadcrumbs. The breadcrumb was not reliably present due to timing issues, causing flaky CI failures. Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com> Agent-Logs-Url: https://github.com/getsentry/sentry-javascript/sessions/6fc52aae-3e31-4ee7-bff3-fda21894f880 Co-authored-by: Lms24 <8420481+Lms24@users.noreply.github.com>
Semver Impact of This PR🟢 Patch (bug fixes) 📋 Changelog PreviewThis is how your changes will appear in the changelog. New Features ✨Core
Deps
Bug Fixes 🐛
Internal Changes 🔧Deps
Other
🤖 This preview updates automatically when you update the PR. |
1 similar comment
Semver Impact of This PR🟢 Patch (bug fixes) 📋 Changelog PreviewThis is how your changes will appear in the changelog. New Features ✨Core
Deps
Bug Fixes 🐛
Internal Changes 🔧Deps
Other
🤖 This preview updates automatically when you update the PR. |
size-limit report 📦
|
|
Hmm so usually I'd dismiss this as heavy AI slop but I'm not really sure why we assert on a navigation breadcrumb in a pageload transaction. Seems to me like chances are pretty high that it's not there reliably. I assume this comes from NextJS client router doing some |
Navigation breadcrumb assertion in nextjs-16 parameterized-routes test is flaky — the breadcrumb isn't reliably present due to timing. These tests validate route parameterization, not breadcrumb recording, so the assertion is unnecessary.
breadcrumbs: expect.arrayContaining([...])from all parameterized-routes tests across all Next.js versions (13, 14, 15, 16, 16-bun, 16-cf-workers)