WireMock stub creation fails: expects 201 but gets 200

[Jos Roseboom]

Hi,

I am new to WireMock and trying to get my first unit test to work with it. Now, following the docs on wiremock.org, I wrote this

 
WireMockConfiguration config = wireMockConfig().port(9089).httpsPort(8443); 
m_wireMockServer = new WireMockServer(config); 
m_wireMockServer.start(); 
WireMock.configureFor("localhost", 9089); 
givenThat(get(urlEqualTo("/some/thing")) 
  .willReturn(aResponse() 
  .withHeader("Content-Type", "text/plain") 
  .withBody("Hello world!")));

I expect this to make any http request to /some/thing to be caught. It gives me the following exception on the giventhat call:

com.github.tomakehurst.wiremock.client.VerificationException: Expected status 201 for http://localhost:9089/__admin/mappings/new but was 200 
at com.github.tomakehurst.wiremock.client.HttpAdminClient.postJsonAssertOkAndReturnBody(HttpAdminClient.java:151) 
at com.github.tomakehurst.wiremock.client.HttpAdminClient.addStubMapping(HttpAdminClient.java:65) 
at com.github.tomakehurst.wiremock.client.WireMock.register(WireMock.java:130) 
at com.github.tomakehurst.wiremock.client.WireMock.register(WireMock.java:126) 
at com.github.tomakehurst.wiremock.client.WireMock.givenThat(WireMock.java:65)

What did I miss? What is wrong in the creation of the stub?

Regards,
Jos

[Tom Akehurst]

Weird, not seen that before.

Are on running the latest version?

[Jos Roseboom]

Hi,

Thanks for your response. I am running on version 1.55, which is the latest version.

Inspecting the code from the stacktrace via https://github.com/tomakehurst/wiremock/blob/master/src/main/java/com/github/tomakehurst/wiremock/client/HttpAdminClient.java I can see that postJsonAssertOkAndReturnBody (line 142) is called with the expected status 201/HTTP_CREATED from line 65. Status 200 is returned, so an Exception is thrown. What I do not understand is why the expected status is 201. Returning 200 does not seem an error to me. Why should this be 201?

[Tom Akehurst]

It should be a 201 because that's the only OK response the mappings/new endpoint will return. There's no code path that should result in a 200, so this is strange behaviour. Is there any chance you're accidentally talking to another web service (I know I've done this in the past!).