Alright, it is merged into the Geb repository (with a quick follow-up push to fix a name).
You can now add it with npx skills add https://github.com/apache/groovy-geb/ and find the geb-spock skill. It's may be worth considering adding variants for the other options, such as geb-junit or geb-testng, but I thought I'd check in with the mailing list before I went hog wild on Geb skills. 🙂 On Mon, Apr 13, 2026 at 6:30 PM James Daugherty <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks Jonny, I was hoping you would have feedback😃. I appreciate the > response and hopefully this is something that can be checked in / provided > in the future. > > Regards, > James > > On Mon, Apr 13, 2026 at 6:12 PM Jonny <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Pardon the multiple messages, but I went ahead and just opened a PR. >> https://github.com/apache/groovy-geb/pull/323 >> >> Comments welcome! >> >> On Mon, Apr 13, 2026 at 4:53 PM Jonny <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Also, to James's idea of publishing the skill on skills.sh, it looks >>> like the Apache Beam folks put their skills in a .agent/skills directory >>> within their repository: >>> https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/master/.agent/skills. Perhaps we >>> could do the same in Groovy and Geb? >>> >>> I know the Spock maintainers have also claimed space on Context7 ( >>> https://github.com/spockframework/spock/commit/6eafb3de4c4042c789d2f508c42808d0b15e38ef >>> ). >>> >>> On Mon, Apr 13, 2026 at 4:48 PM Jonny <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> I added a few more tips that I've picked up over the years. >>>> https://gist.github.com/jonnybot0/dcb7fb817ae6c1860eaec164391b49b7 >>>> >>>> Most are additions (ways to make your test not flaky, link to the Geb >>>> docs), but there is one place that I pushed back hard against James's >>>> clanker: >>>> >>>> > *Overusing required: false* on optional content - the only time you >>>> really want to mark a page element as required: false is when your >>>> spec *needs* to try to interact with it when it's absent (for example, >>>> to assert that it isn't present, !page.buttons.sometimesThereButton). >>>> If the button may or may not be there, but you never test the case where it >>>> isn't there, you should just leave it as required. Remember, throwing an >>>> exception when something *exceptional* happens is okay, especially in >>>> tests! >>>> >>>> This was something that was drilled into me by Marcin, the former >>>> maintainer of Geb *and* hard experience. I saw more than one case >>>> where someone added `required: false` as a way to address flakiness in a >>>> test that only *hid* the flakiness and moved it downstream. And that >>>> someone was, often enough, me. AIs are even more prone to this kind of >>>> quick-fix, unhelpfully-defensive thinking, so it's probably best if we ward >>>> them off it out the gate. >>>> >>>> Best, >>>> >>>> Jonny >>>> >>>> On Mon, Apr 13, 2026 at 11:08 AM James Daugherty via dev < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> This was generated by an AI, but it is probably a good starting point: >>>>> https://gist.github.com/jdaugherty/f63781ff72c826b14f20fc3a2a41020e >>>>> If anyone has feedback, it would be most welcome. >>>>> >>>>> I know that some people are using services like https://skills.sh/ to >>>>> index skills. Creating a dedicated repo for skills may be useful for >>>>> Groovy / Geb. >>>>> >>>>> -James >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Apr 13, 2026 at 8:00 AM Jochen Theodorou <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> > >>>>> > On 4/12/26 19:44, James Daugherty via dev wrote: >>>>> > > Hi Everyone, >>>>> > > >>>>> > > The Grails project has been gradually expanding its Geb test >>>>> coverage >>>>> > > and as we've reviewed the old tests / improved on them, it's become >>>>> > > clear there are some best practices with Geb that we didn't always >>>>> > > follow. This got me thinking: in the age of AI, the Grails team >>>>> has >>>>> > > discussed including AI skills (https://agentskills.io/home) as >>>>> part of >>>>> > > our development process to better help adoption. Has such a topic >>>>> > > been discussed for Geb? Does anyone have a good starting skill for >>>>> > > Geb? >>>>> > Not me, but I would say to just write something and then let other >>>>> > people look over it to improve it. >>>>> > >>>>> > bye Jochen >>>>> >>>>
