Re: [jbehave-user] Do I really need Page Objects?

2013-09-23 Thread Hans Schwäbli
Hello Enrique, it is a bit disappointing to me if you point me to a lot of articles which are not suitable for my arguments. You mention Selenium articles. They assume that tests are written as JUnit tests. They do not assume that JBehave or BDD is used instead. The arguments in the Selenium

RE: [jbehave-user] Do I really need Page Objects?

2013-09-23 Thread Jorge Pombar
Hello Hans, I bet you will now point me to read some books instead of arguing against my arguments That's the key point to me. You are looking for an argument and I'm not. My purpose was just to offer my 2 cent in case it helped you or someone else. It looks like my 2 cents won't help you and

Re: [jbehave-user] JBehave and Maven

2013-09-23 Thread Corbin, J.D.
Hi, that does work for an InstanceStepsFactory, but we are using a GuiceStepsFactory. I'll have to see if there is a way to extend this factory to support this. On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 3:29 PM, Mauro Talevi mauro.tal...@aquilonia.orgwrote: The JBehave lifecycle annotations must found in the

Re: [jbehave-user] Do I really need Page Objects?

2013-09-23 Thread Hans Schwäbli
Hello Enrique, no problem, but I don't understand why you don't provide arguments as I have done. You seem to be easily offended by just one ironic sentence. I intended a productive discussion with you, no quarrel. This requires arguments to be exchanged and an open mind. I have such an open