Finalize initial set of Tenure Relationship Records tests

[seav]

Proposed changes in this pull request

Add automated functional tests for all Tenure Relationship Records test cases as described in the Functional Test Cases spreadsheet and the remaining Location and Party test cases that are related to tenure relationships.

• Bump the package version to 0.5.0.
• Add more test fixtures:
  • 2 tenure relationships relating the existing location and party in the FuncTest Records Prj.
  • FuncTest Custom Party Attrs Prj – Project with a questionnaire having custom attributes only for parties, and having English and Tagalog (using Indonesian code) labels.
    • 1 location under this project.
  • FuncTest Custom Tenure Attrs Prj – Project with a questionnaire having custom attributes only for tenure relationships, and having English and Tagalog (using Indonesian code) labels.
    • 1 location and 1 party under this project.
  • FuncTest Custom-Conditional Attrs Prj – Project with a questionnaire having conditional attributes for parties and custom attributes for tenure relationships, and having English and Spanish labels.
    • 1 location under this project.
  • 3 sets of jsonattrs objects (models: Schema and Attribute) for the 3 new projects above.
  • 3 sets of questionnaires objects (models: Questionnaire, QuestionGroup, Question, QuestionOption) for the 3 new projects above.
• Add 3 new test files corresponding to the XLSForms used to generate the questionnaire test fixtures. These files are not actually used in the tests, but are provided in order to have a source for recreating the test fixtures.
• Adjust the id for the search filter in a resources test because there are now 2 DataTables; one for the newly added relationships and the other for the resources table which is the target of the test.

When should this PR be merged

Preferably within Sprint 2018.01.

Risks

No risks foreseen. This PR should only affect QA and not the actual platform function.

Follow-up actions

Proceed with other test coding.

Checklist (for reviewing)

General

• Is this PR explained thoroughly? All code changes must be accounted for in the PR description.
• Is the PR labeled correctly? It should have the migration label if a new migration is added.
• Is the risk level assessment sufficient? The risks section should contain all risks that might be introduced with the PR and which actions we need to take to mitigate these risks. Possible risks are database migrations, new libraries that need to be installed or changes to deployment scripts.

Functionality

• Are all requirements met? Compare implemented functionality with the requirements specification.
• Does the UI work as expected? There should be no Javascript errors in the console; all resources should load. There should be no unexpected errors. Deliberately try to break the feature to find out if there are corner cases that are not handled.

Code

• Do you fully understand the introduced changes to the code? If not ask for clarification, it might uncover ways to solve a problem in a more elegant and efficient way.
• Does the PR introduce any inefficient database requests? Use the debug server to check for duplicate requests.
• Are all necessary strings marked for translation? All strings that are exposed to users via the UI must be marked for translation.

Tests

• Are there sufficient test cases? Ensure that all components are tested individually; models, forms, and serializers should be tested in isolation even if a test for a view covers these components.
• If this is a bug fix, are tests for the issue in place? There must be a test case for the bug to ensure the issue won’t regress. Make sure that the tests break without the new code to fix the issue.
• If this is a new feature or a significant change to an existing feature? has the manual testing spreadsheet been updated with instructions for manual testing?

Security

• Confirm this PR doesn't commit any keys, passwords, tokens, usernames, or other secrets.
• Are all UI and API inputs run through forms or serializers?
• Are all external inputs validated and sanitized appropriately?
• Does all branching logic have a default case?
• Does this solution handle outliers and edge cases gracefully?
• Are all external communications secured and restricted to SSL?

Documentation

• Are changes to the UI documented in the platform docs? If this PR introduces new platform site functionality or changes existing ones, the changes must be documented in the Cadasta Platform Documentation.
• Are changes to the API documented in the API docs? If this PR introduces new API functionality or changes existing ones, the changes must be documented in the API docs.
• Are reusable components documented? If this PR introduces components that are relevant to other developers (for instance a mixin for a view or a generic form) they should be documented in the Wiki.

[oliverroick]

Can you rebase, merge and release and then bump the version in cadasta-platform