On Jun 8, 9:57 am, Santi <santi...@gmail.com> wrote: > For static html testing, I'd avoid using Selenium. Even though Selenium is > *the* tool for RIA and javascript intensive environments, feels like bringing > up a browser with all the coordination and resources that it takes just to > crawl the website and find 404s is an overkill. > > What we implemented for doing that is just a simple crawler based on urllib: > > < nice code snipped > > > Hope this helps >
Hi, Yes, Santi that does help, a lot. And Burhan thanks--I see how I can use selenium for broken links, but for now at least, I'm going to write my own tests for the static html. After hours of searching and reading, I think my direction is to use Jenkins and Nose together so I can have centralized control over my test runs along with nice reports. I may write a Nose plugin later on for static html, but for now I'll just write simple tests and see how that goes. I don't see that anyone is using nose in this non-standard way (on static html rather than on python code), but I so far I don't see any reason why it won't work. Santi, you gave me a start with that code--I can rewrite that as a nose test and execute it with Jenkins and the broken-link portion of the tests should be done. Does that sound appropriate for my use-case (jenkins/nose-> static html)? The testing is for a large set of documentation that is built daily. thanks again, --Tim -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
