Temporarily remove filtering by a test name from Watch Usage

[thymikee]

Summary

This is a compromise we agreed on for #2978. Let's hide it from regular users until it's solid.
cc: @gaearon @zouxuoz @rogeliog

[thymikee]

@DmitriiAbramov if we don't have breaking changes in master, we could roll v19.1 release.

[rogeliog]

🎉

Should we put it behind a flag? Also, so it is "available" we are just hiding it from the UI

[codecov-io]

Codecov Report

Merging #3253 into master will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@          Coverage Diff           @@
##           master   #3253   +/-   ##
======================================
  Coverage    63.6%   63.6%           
======================================
  Files         175     175           
  Lines        6433    6433           
  Branches        4       4           
======================================
  Hits         4092    4092           
  Misses       2340    2340           
  Partials        1       1

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
packages/jest-cli/src/watch.js	64.61% <ø> (ø)	⬆️

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 2024e3e...e6a225e. Read the comment docs.

[gaearon]

Thanks!

[cpojer]

I'd prefer to fix this up for 20 and not hide it for the next release.

[gaearon]

I would prefer to fix forward too, but is this feasible? Is anyone working on this, and is fixing this a priority?

As of now, I'm hesitant to upgrade CRA to Jest 19 which frustrates users. Waiting for Jest 20 (and then waiting for first bug fixes before adopting it) means potentially not providing 19 to them for another month or two. In the meantime people do weird stuff like this to get Jest to 19 in CRA projects: https://twitter.com/kentcdodds/status/856720119841439744.

I could also bite the bullet and update it to Jest 19 ignoring these issues. Then our users might learn to not trust this feature, and might learn not to use it again. I think this is frustrating because I think the feature has a great potential. I am concerned about this drop in quality as Jest has been only improving recently, and I don’t want people to feel it’s broken ever again.

What do you think is the right compromise for CRA?

[rogeliog]

@gaearon #3287 and #2595 are tracking the work that needs to be done to make the test name filter more usable.

I've been working on #3327 which better integrates the filename and the test name filtering....

I've also been experimenting with #2589, which is my attempt to make it easier to target tests with the test name filter(Just a PoC, still a lot of work left on this one)

[github-actions]

This pull request has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs.
Please note this issue tracker is not a help forum. We recommend using StackOverflow or our discord channel for questions.