On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 7:25 PM, Mark <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 7:57 PM, Howard Lewis Ship <[email protected]> wrote: >> And I wonder if it wouldn't make sense to scrap SeleniumTestCase and >> all that, and just have people do something sensible, like use Geb. > > Geb looks interesting. Do you have any public code that is using it? > I'm curious how you'd handle the setup for Jetty, etc.
We (at Tynamo.org) have been successfully using HtmlUnit-based integration tests running in an embedded Jetty. Setting up Jetty is fairly simple and we keep it in a static property for the duration of the tests, see http://svn.codehaus.org/tynamo/trunk/tapestry-model/tapestry-model-test/src/main/java/org/tynamo/test/AbstractContainerTest.java. Obviously something similar could be paired up with Geb/WebDriver-based tests as well. > I'd think SeleniumTestCase would need to stick around particularly for > people who have a very large number of tests already that depend on > it. Well, they could just use an older version. But for Tapestry, it'd be very valuable if we could retrofit the SeleniumTestCase to use WebDriver api so we wouldn't need to scrap or rewrite all the existing tests. Kalle --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
