Migrate integration tests from TestServerBuilder to TestWebApplicationFactory #51

Krishanthaudayakumara · 2025-09-19T08:21:51Z

Description / Motivation

This PR removes the legacy TestServerBuilder usage from the test and benchmark suites and migrates integration tests to the WebApplicationFactory<TestWebApplicationProgram> pattern (TestWebApplicationFactory). It preserves each fixture’s middleware and service ordering (rendering engine, experience editor, tracking, localization, forwarded headers, visitor identification, etc.) and keeps per-test substitutes/mock handlers where tests rely on specific layout responses.

Key changes

Replaced TestServerBuilder/TestServer with WebApplicationFactory<TestWebApplicationProgram> in all integration tests and benchmarks.
Preserved and validated middleware ordering per-fixture (kept attribute-based rendering behavior by omitting global UseSitecoreRenderingEngine where necessary).
Replaced direct TestServer.CreateClient()/Services usage with factory.CreateClient()/factory.Services and updated disposal.
Added/kept per-test ISitecoreLayoutClient and ISitecoreLayoutSerializer substitutes where fixtures require specific SitecoreLayoutResponse content (e.g., Experience Editor cases that map databaseName = "master").
Migrated benchmarks to use WebApplicationFactory and registered mock HttpMessageHandlers via HttpClientFactory for consistent handler injection.
Fixed compilation issues and runtime startup ordering (ensuring TestServerDefaults runs before per-fixture mock registrations so mocks are not overwritten).
Minor style/analyzer warnings remain (XML docs/usings/ordering); these are low-risk and can be cleaned in a follow-up.

Fixes #36

Testing

The Unit & Intergration tests are passing.
I have added the necessary tests to cover my changes.

Terms

I agree to follow this project's Code of Conduct.

…pdated one binding fixture usage

…6-TestWebApplicationFactoryChanges

…pdated one binding fixture usage

…RenderTypes Fixtures

This reverts commit 5f953d9.

Copilot

Pull Request Overview

This PR migrates integration tests from the legacy TestServerBuilder pattern to the standard WebApplicationFactory<TestWebApplicationProgram> pattern for ASP.NET Core integration testing. The migration preserves middleware ordering and per-test service configuration while modernizing the test infrastructure.

Replaced TestServerBuilder/TestServer with WebApplicationFactory<TestWebApplicationProgram> across all integration tests and benchmarks
Preserved middleware and service ordering for each test fixture while updating configuration patterns
Migrated benchmarks to use the new factory pattern with proper dependency injection

Reviewed Changes

Copilot reviewed 47 out of 47 changed files in this pull request and generated 4 comments.

Show a summary per file

File	Description
TestWebApplicationProgram.cs	New test program entry point for WebApplicationFactory
TrackingProxyFixture.cs	Migrated tracking proxy tests with preserved middleware ordering
TrackingFixture.cs	Updated tracking tests to use factory pattern
AttributeBasedTrackingFixture.cs	Converted attribute-based tracking tests
Various TagHelper fixtures	Migrated all tag helper test fixtures to factory pattern
Various other test fixtures	Updated remaining test fixtures including localization, multisite, and experience editor tests
Benchmark files	Updated benchmark classes to use WebApplicationFactory pattern

_{Tip: Customize your code reviews with copilot-instructions.md. Create the file or learn how to get started.}

...etCore.SDK.RenderingEngine.Integration.Tests/Fixtures/RequestDefaultsConfigurationFixture.cs

.../Sitecore.AspNetCore.SDK.RenderingEngine.Integration.Tests/Fixtures/RequestMappingFixture.cs

...spNetCore.SDK.RenderingEngine.Integration.Tests/Fixtures/Localization/LocalizationFixture.cs

Copilot

Pull Request Overview

Copilot reviewed 47 out of 47 changed files in this pull request and generated 4 comments.

_{Tip: Customize your code reviews with copilot-instructions.md. Create the file or learn how to get started.}

tests/Sitecore.AspNetCore.SDK.RenderingEngine.Integration.Tests/TestWebApplicationProgram.cs

Copilot · 2025-09-22T05:04:49Z

...tCore.SDK.RenderingEngine.Integration.Tests/Fixtures/TagHelpers/TextFieldTagHelperFixture.cs

        });

-        HttpClient client = _server.CreateClient();
+        HttpClient client = BuildTextFieldTagHelperWebApplicationFactory().CreateClient();


The factory is being built and disposed on every test method call. Consider caching the factory instance or using it as a class fixture to avoid repeated initialization overhead.

Suggested change

HttpClient client = BuildTextFieldTagHelperWebApplicationFactory().CreateClient();

HttpClient client = factory.CreateClient();

Made those changes here - https://github.com/Krishanthaudayakumara/ASP.NET-Core-SDK/pull/37/files
Should get reviewed before merge

tests/Sitecore.AspNetCore.SDK.RenderingEngine.Benchmarks/TrackingBenchmarks.cs

...s/Sitecore.AspNetCore.SDK.RenderingEngine.Integration.Tests/Fixtures/ErrorHandlingFixture.cs

…ting up the response in the constructor consistently in EdgeSitemapProxyFixture

Migrate integration test fixtures to shared TestWebApplicationFactory

Copilot

Pull Request Overview

Copilot reviewed 47 out of 47 changed files in this pull request and generated 2 comments.

_{Tip: Customize your code reviews with copilot-instructions.md. Create the file or learn how to get started.}

Copilot · 2025-09-30T03:57:01Z

...ngEngine.Integration.Tests/Fixtures/ExperienceEditor/ExperienceEditorCustomRoutingFixture.cs

+                ISitecoreLayoutClient layoutClientSub = Substitute.For<ISitecoreLayoutClient>();
+                SitecoreLayoutRequest sampleRequest = [];
+                SitecoreLayoutResponse sampleResponse = new(sampleRequest)
+                {
+                    Content = new SitecoreLayoutResponseContent
+                    {
+                        Sitecore = new SitecoreData
+                        {
+                            Route = new Route
+                            {
+                                DatabaseName = "master"
+                            }
+                        },
+                        ContextRawData = string.Empty
+                    }
+                };


[nitpick] This mock setup is duplicating logic that could be extracted to a helper method or constant. Consider creating a shared test data factory method to reduce duplication and improve maintainability.

Used the same approach TestServerBuilder used: register a simple mock ISitecoreLayoutClient singleton instead of constructing a sampleRequest/sampleResponse.- ExperienceEditorCustomRoutingFixture.cs - Krishanthaudayakumara@8779577

Copilot · 2025-09-30T03:57:01Z

tests/Sitecore.AspNetCore.SDK.RenderingEngine.Benchmarks/RenderingEngineBenchmarks.cs

+                    builder.ConfigureServices(services =>
+                    {
+                        services.AddRouting();
+                        services.AddSitecoreLayoutService();


Similar to the tracking benchmarks, the layout service registration is missing the connection to the 'mock' HttpClient. The layout service needs to be configured to use the mock handler via .AddHttpHandler() method chain.

Suggested change

services.AddSitecoreLayoutService();

services.AddSitecoreLayoutService().AddHttpHandler("mock");

This won't work, but I implemented register a mock HttpMessageHandler and configure the Sitecore layout service like previous here - Krishanthaudayakumara@16b6bbc

…ISitecoreLayoutClient singleton instead of constructing a sampleRequest/sampleResponse.- ExperienceEditorCustomRoutingFixture.cs

- Use the same approach TestServerBuilder used: register a simple mock ISitecoreLayoutClient singleton instead of constructing a sampleRequest/sampleResponse.- ExperienceEditorCustomRoutingFixture.cs - wire layout service to mock HttpClient in RenderingEngine benchmarks

Copilot

Pull Request Overview

Copilot reviewed 47 out of 47 changed files in this pull request and generated 5 comments.

_{Tip: Customize your code reviews with copilot-instructions.md. Create the file or learn how to get started.}

Copilot · 2025-09-30T04:32:51Z

tests/Sitecore.AspNetCore.SDK.RenderingEngine.Integration.Tests/TestWebApplicationProgram.cs

+app.Run();
+


The app.Run() call will block the thread indefinitely in test scenarios. Consider using app.Start() or removing this line since WebApplicationFactory handles application lifecycle management.

Suggested change

app.Run();

Used app.Start(); - Krishanthaudayakumara@b585376

Copilot · 2025-09-30T04:32:51Z

...e.AspNetCore.SDK.RenderingEngine.Integration.Tests/Fixtures/Tracking/TrackingProxyFixture.cs

+                services.AddRouting();
+                services.AddControllersWithViews();


[nitpick] These service registrations are duplicated across multiple test fixtures. Consider extracting common service registration logic into a shared helper method to reduce code duplication.

I guess it’s fine to leave those two lines duplicated in fixtures when any of the following apply and better readability, and avoid further complexity.

Copilot · 2025-09-30T04:32:51Z

...e.SDK.RenderingEngine.Integration.Tests/Fixtures/TagHelpers/RichTextFieldTagHelperFixture.cs

                });
            });
+        });



The variable startedServer is assigned but never used. This appears to be a pattern to force server startup - consider adding a comment explaining this purpose or removing if unnecessary.

Suggested change

// Accessing _factory.Server forces the TestServer to start. The variable is unused; this is intentional.

added comment - Krishanthaudayakumara@05d4eaf

Copilot · 2025-09-30T04:32:52Z

...s/Sitecore.AspNetCore.SDK.RenderingEngine.Integration.Tests/Fixtures/ErrorHandlingFixture.cs

    [Theory]
    [AutoNSubstituteData(nameof(InvalidHttpMessageConfiguration))]
-    public async Task HttpMessageConfigurationError_Returns_SitecoreLayoutServiceMessageConfigurationException(TestServer server, MockHttpMessageHandler clientHandler)
+    public async Task HttpMessageConfigurationError_Returns_SitecoreLayoutServiceMessageConfigurationException(TestWebApplicationFactory<TestWebApplicationProgram> factory, MockHttpMessageHandler clientHandler)


The method parameter factory is not used directly in the method body. The actual factory configuration happens inline within the method, making this parameter misleading.

It's incorrect, the factory parameter is used, it’s the base factory the method calls WithWebHostBuilder on to create configuredFactory there -
WebApplicationFactory<TestWebApplicationProgram> configuredFactory = factory.WithWebHostBuilder(builder =>

Copilot · 2025-09-30T04:32:52Z

tests/Sitecore.AspNetCore.SDK.RenderingEngine.Benchmarks/TrackingBenchmarks.cs


-                builder.AddSitecoreRenderingEngine(options =>
+                    services.AddSitecoreLayoutService();
+                    services.AddHttpClient("mock").ConfigurePrimaryHttpMessageHandler(() => _mockClientHandler!);


[nitpick] The HTTP client registration pattern is inconsistent with the integration tests which use AddHttpHandler. This inconsistency could lead to different behavior between tests and benchmarks.

Suggested change

services.AddHttpClient("mock").ConfigurePrimaryHttpMessageHandler(() => _mockClientHandler!);

services.AddHttpHandler(_mockClientHandler!);

Used the same layout service builder pattern which used previously - Krishanthaudayakumara@5a6dd01

…ngBenchmarks

- use app.Start() in TestWebApplicationProgram - Add comment explaining variable startedServer - Use the same layout-service builder pattern previously used in TrackingBenchmarks

Copilot

Pull Request Overview

Copilot reviewed 47 out of 47 changed files in this pull request and generated 5 comments.

_{Tip: Customize your code reviews with copilot-instructions.md. Create the file or learn how to get started.}

Copilot · 2025-09-30T07:56:35Z

...e.SDK.RenderingEngine.Integration.Tests/Fixtures/TagHelpers/RichTextFieldTagHelperFixture.cs


-        _server = testHostBuilder.BuildServer(new Uri("http://localhost"));
+        // Accessing _factory.Server forces the TestServer to start. The variable is unused; this is intentional.
+        TestServer startedServer = _factory.Server;


[nitpick] The comment explanation is helpful, but consider using a more standard approach like _ = _factory.Server; to clearly indicate the variable is intentionally unused.

Suggested change

TestServer startedServer = _factory.Server;

_ = _factory.Server;

made it to use _ = _factory.Server; - Krishanthaudayakumara#40

Copilot · 2025-09-30T07:56:36Z

...tecore.AspNetCore.SDK.RenderingEngine.Integration.Tests/Fixtures/Tracking/TrackingFixture.cs

+                services.AddRouting();
+                services.AddControllersWithViews();


[nitpick] These service registrations are repeated across many fixtures. Consider extracting common service registration patterns into a shared helper method to reduce duplication.

I guess it’s fine to leave those two lines duplicated in fixtures when any of the following apply and better readability, and avoid further complexity.

Copilot · 2025-09-30T07:56:36Z

...SDK.RenderingEngine.Integration.Tests/Fixtures/SearchOptimization/EdgeSitemapProxyFixture.cs

-                                ]
+                                SiteInfo = new SiteInfo
+                                {
+                                    Sitemap = new[] { _edgeSitemapUrl.ToString() }


[nitpick] The array initialization syntax has been changed from collection expression [...] to array initialization new[] {...}. Consider using the more modern collection expression syntax for consistency.

Suggested change

Sitemap = new[] { _edgeSitemapUrl.ToString() }

Sitemap = [ _edgeSitemapUrl.ToString() ]

made it to use this approach - Krishanthaudayakumara#40

Copilot · 2025-09-30T07:56:36Z

...AspNetCore.SDK.RenderingEngine.Integration.Tests/Fixtures/RequestHeadersValidationFixture.cs

 namespace Sitecore.AspNetCore.SDK.RenderingEngine.Integration.Tests.Fixtures;

-public class RequestHeadersValidationFixture : IDisposable
+public class RequestHeadersValidationFixture(TestWebApplicationFactory<TestWebApplicationProgram> factory) : IClassFixture<TestWebApplicationFactory<TestWebApplicationProgram>>, IDisposable


[nitpick] Using primary constructor syntax here creates inconsistency with other fixtures that use traditional constructors. Consider standardizing the constructor pattern across all fixtures.

Refactored it to use similar constructor pattern - Krishanthaudayakumara#40

Copilot · 2025-09-30T07:56:36Z

...s/Sitecore.AspNetCore.SDK.RenderingEngine.Integration.Tests/Fixtures/ErrorHandlingFixture.cs

    };

    [Theory]
    [AutoNSubstituteData(nameof(InvalidHttpMessageConfiguration))]


The test method parameter type has changed from TestServer to TestWebApplicationFactory<TestWebApplicationProgram> but still uses the old AutoNSubstituteData attribute. Verify that the test data generation is compatible with the new parameter type.

Suggested change

[AutoNSubstituteData(nameof(InvalidHttpMessageConfiguration))]

[AutoData]

AutoNSubstituteData(nameof(InvalidHttpMessageConfiguration)) injects the MockHttpMessageHandler and TestWebApplicationFactory (via the named fixture action).
The injected factory is used (factory.WithWebHostBuilder(...) -> configuredFactory), so the parameter is required.
No attribute or signature change needed.

…nally unused

…n EdgeSitemapProxyFixture

…ctor pattern like other fixtures

- use _ = _factory.Server; to clearly indicate the variable is intentionally - using the more modern collection expression syntax for consistency in EdgeSitemapProxyFixture - Refactor RequestHeadersValidationFixture to implement similar constructor pattern like other fixtures

robearlam and others added 30 commits September 12, 2025 15:05

Refactored TestWebApplicationFactory usage, updated Pages Fixtures, u…

6ac0dea

…pdated one binding fixture usage

Merge branch 'feat/36-TestWebApplicationFactoryMigration' into feat/3…

6af9aae

…6-TestWebApplicationFactoryChanges

Refactored TestWebApplicationFactory usage, updated Pages Fixtures, u…

197e9e0

…pdated one binding fixture usage

Migrate ModelBindingFixture.cs

c5f63b7

Migrate ModelBindingErrorHandlingFixture.cs

d44de35

Migrate CustomModelContextBindingFixture.cs

e4890f5

Migrate CustomResolverBindingFixture.cs

1fbb5a0

Migrate ViewFieldsBindingFixture.cs

74fbf45

Migrate custom render types fixtures

8d56749

Apply the same file-specific rename pattern to the Binding and Custom…

d3317b7

…RenderTypes Fixtures

migrate ForwardHeadersToLayoutServiceFixture

a7443f4

Migrate Localization fixtures

5f953d9

Revert "Migrate Localization fixtures"

381f7f6

This reverts commit 5f953d9.

Migrate Multisite fixture

b984d87

Migrate SearchOptimization fixtures

07a4c03

Migrate TagHelper Fixtures

6740448

Migrate RequestHeadersValidationFixture

80e47d8

Migrate ControllerMiddlewareFixture

5f6fecb

Migrate ErrorHandlingFixture

e67407f

Migrate GlobalMiddlewareFixture

34535ad

Migrate SitecoreLayoutClientBuilderExtensionsFixture

f954915

Migtrate RequestDefaultsConfigurationFixture

459624d

Remove unused package- RequestDefaultsConfigurationFixture

ccd8ef7

Migrate RequestExtensionsFixture

6eba6ef

Migrate RequestMappingFixture

8e5f519

Migrate Tracking Fixtures

7bcfb2f

Migrate Localization fixtures

2e6b703

Restructure methods to fix warnings

b93f305

Migrate ExperienceEditor fixtures

1f6c2ed

Migrate Benchmarks tests

7b07bc7

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings September 19, 2025 08:21

Copilot AI reviewed Sep 19, 2025

View reviewed changes

revert syntax changes

09a1244

Krishanthaudayakumara requested a review from Copilot September 22, 2025 05:03

Copilot AI reviewed Sep 22, 2025

View reviewed changes

Krishanthaudayakumara added 4 commits September 22, 2025 15:35

Explicitly start the host without creating an unused client

28d9311

test(fixture): reuse TestWebApplicationFactory across integration tests

a6558e6

add default response and start TestServer in MultisiteFixture and set…

3c2b7f2

…ting up the response in the constructor consistently in EdgeSitemapProxyFixture

Migrate integration test fixtures to shared TestWebApplicationFactory

7750d47

Migrate integration test fixtures to shared TestWebApplicationFactory

Krishanthaudayakumara requested a review from Copilot September 30, 2025 03:56

Copilot AI reviewed Sep 30, 2025

View reviewed changes

Krishanthaudayakumara added 3 commits September 30, 2025 09:39

Use the same approach TestServerBuilder used: register a simple mock …

8779577

…ISitecoreLayoutClient singleton instead of constructing a sampleRequest/sampleResponse.- ExperienceEditorCustomRoutingFixture.cs

wire layout service to mock HttpClient in RenderingEngine benchmarks

16b6bbc

Krishanthaudayakumara requested a review from Copilot September 30, 2025 04:31

Copilot AI reviewed Sep 30, 2025

View reviewed changes

Krishanthaudayakumara added 5 commits September 30, 2025 10:28

use app.Start() in TestWebApplicationProgram

b585376

Add comment explaining variable startedServer

05d4eaf

Use the same layout-service builder pattern previously used in Tracki…

5a6dd01

…ngBenchmarks

Minor change of new line after single line comment

496fa60

Merge pull request #39 - Fixes regarding to Copilot reviews

f99bd36

- use app.Start() in TestWebApplicationProgram - Add comment explaining variable startedServer - Use the same layout-service builder pattern previously used in TrackingBenchmarks

Krishanthaudayakumara requested a review from Copilot September 30, 2025 07:54

Copilot AI reviewed Sep 30, 2025

View reviewed changes

Krishanthaudayakumara added 4 commits September 30, 2025 13:33

use _ = _factory.Server; to clearly indicate the variable is intentio…

629695a

…nally unused

using the more modern collection expression syntax for consistency i…

fb87e28

…n EdgeSitemapProxyFixture

Refactor RequestHeadersValidationFixture to implement similar constru…

0d5ba60

…ctor pattern like other fixtures

	HttpClient client = BuildTextFieldTagHelperWebApplicationFactory().CreateClient();
	HttpClient client = factory.CreateClient();

	services.AddSitecoreLayoutService();
	services.AddSitecoreLayoutService().AddHttpHandler("mock");



	// Accessing _factory.Server forces the TestServer to start. The variable is unused; this is intentional.

	services.AddHttpClient("mock").ConfigurePrimaryHttpMessageHandler(() => _mockClientHandler!);
	services.AddHttpHandler(_mockClientHandler!);

	TestServer startedServer = _factory.Server;
	_ = _factory.Server;

	Sitemap = new[] { _edgeSitemapUrl.ToString() }
	Sitemap = [ _edgeSitemapUrl.ToString() ]

	[AutoNSubstituteData(nameof(InvalidHttpMessageConfiguration))]
	[AutoData]

Migrate integration tests from TestServerBuilder to TestWebApplicationFactory #51

Are you sure you want to change the base?

Migrate integration tests from TestServerBuilder to TestWebApplicationFactory #51

Uh oh!

Conversation

Krishanthaudayakumara commented Sep 19, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Description / Motivation

Testing

Terms

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull Request Overview

Reviewed Changes

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull Request Overview

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Sep 22, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Krishanthaudayakumara Sep 23, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull Request Overview

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Sep 30, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Sep 30, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull Request Overview

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Sep 30, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Sep 30, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Sep 30, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Krishanthaudayakumara Sep 30, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Sep 30, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Sep 30, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Krishanthaudayakumara commented Sep 19, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Krishanthaudayakumara Sep 23, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Krishanthaudayakumara Sep 30, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Krishanthaudayakumara Sep 30, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Krishanthaudayakumara Sep 30, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Krishanthaudayakumara Sep 30, 2025 •

edited

Loading