@Olivier

All my tests are runing on both enviroments (browser and nodejs), and they
include tests with dom elements.
To use dom elements on nodejs take a look at jsdom.

http://github.com/tmpvar/jsdom/

I've just added one file that just makes a "window" object from jsdom and
merges its attributes with the "global" object (which is the "window" of
nodejs). By doing this i have a "fake" browser enviroment, that works pretty
well.


--
Fábio Miranda Costa
front...@portalpadroes
Globo.com
*github:* fabiomcosta
*twitter:* @fabiomiranda
*ramal:* 6410



On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 5:15 PM, Olivier El Mekki <[email protected]>wrote:

> Thanks to both,
>
> The project won't start before 2~4 weeks but I'm gonna play a bit with
> that before.
>
> I saw that there's a DOM/BOM implementation for commonJS that could lead
> to get some fixtures for the dom related code :
> http://github.com/tmpvar/jsdom
>
> It was reported to work well with node.js :
>
> http://www.yuiblog.com/blog/2010/04/09/node-js-yui-3-dom-manipulation-oh-my/
>
> The question is : does it worth it? I'm not sure testing the client-side
> javascript code is that relevant outside of the browser, since what
> works in node.js can actually be broken in (guess who?) ie.
>
> @Fabio: What part of your code are you testing on your ci app, and do
> you need to run classical in-browser test suite?
>
>
> On 11:43 Thu 28 Oct     , Aaron Newton wrote:
> > It's on my todo list to do this for mootools itself. I'd be interested in
> > collaborating a bit. I've been contributing to windmill a bit with plans
> on
> > hudston + windmill + our various test environments (there are a few).
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 11:04 AM, Olivier El Mekki <[email protected]
> >wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I was asked to write some mootools code for a project built in a
> > > continuous integration process.
> > >
> > > Does anyone know if the new mootools' spec engine, mootools runner,
> > > plays well with hudson?
> > >
> > > --
> > > Olivier El Mekki.
> > >
>
> --
> Olivier El Mekki.
>

Reply via email to