Render docs blocks in exposures

[joellabes]

resolves #2913

Description

Should ensure that docs blocks render correctly in exposures' descriptions.

Checklist

• I have signed the CLA
• I have run this code in development and it appears to resolve the stated issue
• This PR includes tests, or tests are not required/relevant for this PR
• I have updated the CHANGELOG.md and added information about my change to the "dbt next" section.

[joellabes]

@jtcohen6 I've tested this works with my failing example in #2913. I'm not sure what unit tests I'll need to add or how to go about that, so expecting another couple of rounds of feedback before this can be merged.

[jtcohen6]

Nice!

I left a comment around a failing mypy test.

The failing unit tests have to do with TestUnparsedExposure:

https://github.com/fishtown-analytics/dbt/blob/fec0e31a25d5b922cb1833cffcb5095eb4ee642b/test/unit/test_contracts_graph_unparsed.py#L574-L605

In particular, now that the UnparsedExposure inherits from HasYamlMetadata, we need to add three more attributes to get_ok_dict (as JSON) and test_ok (as arguments to self.ContractType):

yaml_key: 'exposures',
original_file_path: '/some/fake/path',
package_name: 'test',

That gets us up to status quo ante. As far as a new test, to ensure that this continues to work, I'd recommend that you add a doc-using exposure here, to parallel what we already have here. That will also require adding the "expected" value of the new exposure here.

[joellabes]

This all makes sense, will check it out soon!

That will also require adding the "expected" value of the new exposure here.

If there's already two "normal" exposures documented (simple_exposure and notebook_exposure), why is test_docs_generate's exposures object currently empty? Should I be fleshing it out to contain the other two as well?

[jtcohen6]

If there's already two "normal" exposures documented (simple_exposure and notebook_exposure), why is test_docs_generate's exposures object currently empty? Should I be fleshing it out to contain the other two as well?

Those "normal" exposures are defined for the "normal" models test, but there aren't any exposures defined for the ref_models test, i.e. the one that tests various resources using doc blocks.

[joellabes]

OK I've made those changes, but when I try to run the tests locally it doesn't work:

(env) Serenity:dbt joel$ make test-unit
Unit test run starting...
docker-compose: No such file or directory
        0.00 real         0.00 user         0.00 sys
make: *** [test-unit] Error 127

The contributing guide assumes more prior knowledge than I have for making this go unfortunately

[jtcohen6]

No worries! I think you're really close.

As far as local tests: Do you have docker downloaded on your machine?

If you can't get those to work, running tests by pushing commits to CI is also just fine.

[joellabes]

I feel like I saw a way to add an ignore-whitespace instruction somewhere, but am doing this for now

[jtcohen6]

I think this latest failure comes from the fact that exposure.test.notebook_exposure is missing from parent_map and child_map for the ref_models test:

https://github.com/fishtown-analytics/dbt/blob/34869fc2a2a354a18a232e21315c3901aafab0b6/test/integration/029_docs_generate_tests/test_docs_generate.py#L2086-L2101

You can check the exposures in the previous test to see how they should appear in parent/child map.

Very close!

[joellabes]

[jtcohen6]

Nice work!! Thanks for the contribution @joellabes

[joellabes]

Couldn't have done it without you!