-Enable blocking queries by default
-Change assertion to check for the last PUT request, not just any request for session destruction from a node page.
Since we've now turned on blocking queries by default this means that a
second GET request is made after the PUT request that we are asserting
for but before the assertion itself, this meant the assertion failed. We
double checked this by turning off blocking queries for this test using
```
And settings from yaml
---
consul:client:
blocking: 0
---
```
which made the test pass again.
As moving forwards blocking queries will be on by default, we didn't
want to disable blocking queries for this test, so we now assert the
last PUT request specifically. This means we continue to assert that the
session has been destroyed but means we don't get into problems of
ordering of requests here
1. Addition of external source icons for services marked as such.
2. New %with-tooltip css component (wip)
3. New 'no healthcheck' icon as external sources might not have
healthchecks, also minus icon on node cards in the service detail view
4. If a service doesn't have healthchecks, we use the [Services] tabs as the
default instead of the [Health Checks] tab in the Service detail page.
5. `css-var` helper. The idea here is that it will eventually be
replaced with pure css custom properties instead of having to use JS. It
would be nice to be able to build the css variables into the JS at build
time (you'd probably still want to specify in config which variables you
wanted available in JS), but that's possible future work.
Lastly there is probably a tiny bit more testing edits here than usual,
I noticed that there was an area where the dynamic mocking wasn't
happening, it was just using the mocks from consul-api-double, the mocks
I was 'dynamically' setting happened to be the same as the ones in
consul-api-double. I've fixed this here also but it wasn't effecting
anything until actually made certain values dynamic.
* Move notification texts to a slightly different layer (#4572)
* Further Simplify/refactor the actions/notification layer (#4573)
1. Move the 'with-feedback' actions to a 'with-blocking-action' mixin
which better describes what it does
2. Additional set of unit tests almost over the entire layer to prove
things work/add confidence for further changes
The multiple 'with-action' mixins used for every 'index/edit' combo are
now reduced down to only contain the functionality related to their
specific routes, i.e. where to redirect.
The actual functionality to block and carry out the action and then
notify are 'almost' split out so that their respective classes/objects do
one thing and one thing 'well'.
Mixins are chosen for the moment as the decoration approach used by
mixins feels better than multiple levels of inheritence, but I would
like to take this fuether in the future to a 'compositional' based
approach.
There is still possible further work to be done here, but I'm a lot
happier now this is reduced down into separate parts.
John Cowen