Support Requests item #1033022, was opened at 2004-09-22 17:56 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by jimweaver You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=497983&aid=1033022&group_id=61302
Category: None >Group: Release 1.3 >Status: Closed Priority: 5 Submitted By: Srinivasan Ranganthan (srinirang) Assigned to: Jim Weaver (jimweaver) Summary: Decision on 1004243 - Associating a WebTester with a HTTPUni Initial Comment: Hi Sometime ago, I sent an email to the user and developer lists and a subsequent patch. I'd like to know if the community thinks this is a reasonable approach. I'd also like to know if this patch would be included in 1.3? Mail Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg00104.html Issue on SF: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=1004243&group_id=61302&atid=497984 Cheers Srini ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Jim Weaver (jimweaver) Date: 2004-09-30 11:18 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=619947 Resolved both issues as part of patch 1004243 integration. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Jim Weaver (prospero2000us) Date: 2004-09-30 10:45 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=597548 OK - will do setter. Yup, the access modifier on setFormElementWithLabel an oops - should be public to support delegation. Will fix as part of closing the patch you submitted. cheers jim ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Srinivasan Ranganthan (srinirang) Date: 2004-09-28 15:52 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=1097914 A setter sounds good. Also, WebTester.setFormElementWithLabel(String formElementLabel, String value) is protected. Is this deliberate? I think not since all other methods with similar functionality are public. Can this be made public? IMHO, it'll be much more useful. Cheers Srini ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Jim Weaver (jimweaver) Date: 2004-09-28 09:37 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=619947 I a little wary of a constructor of WebTestCase /WebTester that takes an HttpUnitDialog as a parameter. The point of the dialog is to keep state behind the scenes, and I think that adding that constructor will cause some confusion for 95% of the folks that don't need to move state from one testcase to another. Perhaps just a simple setter for the HttpUnitDialog on WebTester instead? That would sit out of the way and fairly unobtrusive - but should let you do exactly the same thing. Cheers, Jim ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=497983&aid=1033022&group_id=61302 ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: IT Product Guide on ITManagersJournal Use IT products in your business? Tell us what you think of them. Give us Your Opinions, Get Free ThinkGeek Gift Certificates! Click to find out more http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/guidepromo.tmpl _______________________________________________ Jwebunit-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jwebunit-users
