Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add Seq Module #1276

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: develop
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

montanehamilton
Copy link

What does this PR do?

New module to support the Seq logging server.

Why is it important?

Another module to make it easy for developers needing Seq to get testing quickly.

How to test this PR

Automated test added to demonstrate the Seq server accepts logs and that those logs can be read via the API.

Copy link

netlify bot commented Oct 8, 2024

Deploy Preview for testcontainers-dotnet ready!

Name Link
🔨 Latest commit 8cad0fb
🔍 Latest deploy log https://app.netlify.com/sites/testcontainers-dotnet/deploys/67462bf3b6839300080d84eb
😎 Deploy Preview https://deploy-preview-1276--testcontainers-dotnet.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile
Toggle QR Code...

QR Code

Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration.

@TechLiam
Copy link
Contributor

Very glad you have PRed this in it was on my list of ones to do if someone hadn't :)

@montanehamilton montanehamilton force-pushed the feature/add-seq-module branch 4 times, most recently from e7da3c7 to 3ee32fd Compare October 15, 2024 14:08
@HofmeisterAn HofmeisterAn added enhancement New feature or request module An official Testcontainers module labels Oct 15, 2024
@PureKrome
Copy link

👋🏻 G'Day @montanehamilton ,

question: what is the use case for having Seq in a TC? I use Seq all the time .. love it! but ... I've never seen a use for it as a test container?

I'm really curious to learn why.

@montanehamilton
Copy link
Author

👋🏻 G'Day @montanehamilton ,

question: what is the use case for having Seq in a TC? I use Seq all the time .. love it! but ... I've never seen a use for it as a test container?

I'm really curious to learn why.

Logging is a requirement and ensuring applications can actually log and that those logs actually get to the logging provider, in this case Seq, is a nice, automated test to have. Maintaining a library that has additional logic in a custom Seq client means one should make sure it actually works against the target provider.

@PureKrome
Copy link

Logging is a requirement and ensuring applications can actually log and that those logs actually get to the logging provider

Hmm .. ok. So if I'm reading this correctly, you're testing that your logging configuration (to seq) is correct? Or you're testing either the MS-Logging to Serilog-Logging method you're using to log .. works?

@montanehamilton
Copy link
Author

montanehamilton commented Nov 26, 2024

Logging is a requirement and ensuring applications can actually log and that those logs actually get to the logging provider

Hmm .. ok. So if I'm reading this correctly, you're testing that your logging configuration (to seq) is correct? Or you're testing either the MS-Logging to Serilog-Logging method you're using to log .. works?

Implicitly we're "testing" those perhaps but the point is to ensure the values we expect on our logs get logged. We're really testing how we're using those methods and doing an automated integration test to assert it's all working correctly and we're sending the expected properties.

No different to using a database container to run an integration test for our application even though we use Entity Framework or Dapper. Regardless of them "working" how you use them matters.

@montanehamilton montanehamilton force-pushed the feature/add-seq-module branch 3 times, most recently from 5daf65c to e9be189 Compare November 26, 2024 18:33
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request module An official Testcontainers module
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants