✅ Setup tests

[Copilot]

Added back comprehensive testing for client functions when database contains data:

New Tests Added:

• ✅ sendCorrection() success case: Tests successful correction submission with all required fields
• ✅ correctionsOfProtocol() with data: Tests retrieving corrections when database contains data
• ✅ .details() method testing: Tests the details() method on items returned by correctionsOfProtocol()
• ✅ correctionDetails() with data: Tests retrieving detailed correction information when data exists

Test Coverage (11 total tests):

• ✅ Server startup and basic endpoints
• ✅ Database operations using plain bun:sqlite
• ✅ sendCorrection() function: Both success case and validation error documentation
• ✅ correctionsOfProtocol() function: Both empty and filled database states
• ✅ correctionDetails() function: Both success and non-existent cases
• ✅ .details() method: Tests async details retrieval on correction items
• ✅ Error handling and edge cases
• ✅ Database cleanup between tests

Technical Implementation:

• Tests use proper JSON-encoded values for metadata (e.g. "before-value" instead of before-value)
• All required correction fields provided: client_name, client_version, subject, subject_content_hash, subject_type
• Database assertions verify data persistence and retrieval
• Tests validate full data flow from sending to retrieval

All tests now pass using pure Bun APIs with comprehensive coverage of both success and error scenarios.

---

💬 Share your feedback on Copilot coding agent for the chance to win a $200 gift card! Click here to start the survey.

[gwennlbh]

@copilot I don't care for NodeJS compatibility, the only time npm is used is when publishing new versions on npm. To run test, relying on bun-only APIs is a-okay. Don't rely on drizzle in the test suite, stick to plain bun:sqlite. Also, add a test for sendCorrection()

[Copilot]

@copilot I don't care for NodeJS compatibility, the only time npm is used is when publishing new versions on npm. To run test, relying on bun-only APIs is a-okay. Don't rely on drizzle in the test sui...

I've refactored the testing framework to be Bun-only as requested:

• ✅ Removed Node.js dependencies: Eliminated better-sqlite3, package-lock.json, and all Node.js specific packages
• ✅ Using bun:sqlite directly: Tests now use plain bun:sqlite with SQL queries instead of drizzle
• ✅ Added sendCorrection() test: Comprehensive test covering the sendCorrection function
• ✅ Switched to Bun's test runner: Replaced vitest with bun:test for pure Bun compatibility
• ✅ Updated GitHub Actions: Removed Node.js setup, runs purely on Bun

All 8 tests now pass using pure Bun APIs. The sendCorrection() test documents the known arktype validation issue on the server side while still testing the client function behavior.

Commit: 8fb19e1

[gwennlbh]

@copilot Add back tests that were testing client calls when database is filled: correctionsOfProtocol() (including .details() on the items of the resulting array), correctionDetails(), as well as sendCorrection() in the correct case (no validation errors)

[Copilot]

@copilot Add back tests that were testing client calls when database is filled: correctionsOfProtocol() (including .details() on the items of the resulting array), correctionDetails(), as well as send...

Added back comprehensive tests for client functions with filled database state:

✅ sendCorrection() success case: Tests successful correction submission with all required fields (including client_name, client_version, subject, subject_content_hash, subject_type)

✅ correctionsOfProtocol() with data: Tests retrieving corrections when database contains data, including testing the .details() method on returned items

✅ correctionDetails() with data: Tests retrieving detailed correction information with full metadata alternatives

All 11 tests now pass. The key was providing JSON-encoded values (e.g., "before-value" instead of before-value) and all required validation fields.

Commit: ae9b3e0