2009/8/12 Mauro Talevi <[email protected]>

> Hi Dan,
>
> they actually address very different concerns.


Ah, fantastic. My stupid. As you were, troops.

Cheers,
Dan

The web scenario runner is a webapp that aims to provide a simple web
> interface to run any scenario (which could be a scenario that uses Selenium
> under the hood, but in most cases it won't be a web-related scenario).    So
> as such it has nothing to do with Selenium compatibility or the Selenium
> API.  In my current project we use the scenario web runner to drive
> core-backed demos or to set up data for web-based demos.   The web-demos may
> be run manually or automated via Selenium.
>
> The jbehave-selenium module (include in same JBehave Web release) on the
> other hand is a collection of utility classes that aims to provide a better
> integration between JBehave and Selenium.  E.g. it provides a SeleniumSteps
> class that Selenium-based scenarios can use as a base class.
>
> Hope that clarifies the scope of the two concerns.
>
> I've tried to make clear this distinction in docs:
>
> http://jbehave.org/documentation/web-integration/
>
> Cheers
>
> Dan North wrote:
>
>> Hi Mauro.
>>
>> What is the overlap/similarity/alignment with this and, say, the Selenium
>> API? Would it be worth making it Selenium-compatible or am I barking up the
>> wrong tree?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Dan
>>
>>
>> 2009/8/9 Mauro Talevi <[email protected] <mailto:
>> [email protected]>>
>>
>>    Folks,
>>
>>    I've published 2.0-rc1 of JBehave Web release, which provided an web
>>    integration layer on top of JBehave Core.  The main objective of
>>    this layer is to provide a simple web-based interface to running
>>    scenarios. A typical use case of this is when non-developers (e.g.
>>    BAs/QAs) need to run scenarios without accessing developer resources
>>    such as source control or the build setup.
>>
>>    The scenario web runner has been in use on a commercial project for
>>    several months (via its successive betas) and has been tested in
>>    both Jetty and WebSphere, although is should work for any standard
>>    compliant servlet container.
>>
>>    More info on:
>>
>>    http://jbehave.org/documentation/web-integration/scenario-web-runner/
>>
>>    As it's proven quite stable, I'd like to call for a 2.0 release.
>>
>>    Any objections or reasons not to?
>>
>>    Cheers
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>    ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>    To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
>>
>>      http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
>
>   http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>
>
>

Reply via email to