n/closer.cgi/wicket/1.3.
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
--
View this message in context:
On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 11:28 PM, Martijn Dashorst <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I just confirmed that watir sucks: it is IE/Windows only. This makes
> it unsuitable to use it inside my company where we value running build
> servers on linux. I'm working on OS X which makes building tests a
> disas
hehe on the watir point, I wonder if windows are finally loosing the
battle(not wanting to start a religious war though):)
btw an a thing that you could you if interested are to use jmeter in
conjunction with selenium. Eg you always have your selenium test which
runs.. And then when you decide
I just confirmed that watir sucks: it is IE/Windows only. This makes
it unsuitable to use it inside my company where we value running build
servers on linux. I'm working on OS X which makes building tests a
disaster (not to mention that the damned safari port won't build on my
mac).
Martijn
On We
On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 11:00 PM, Timo Rantalaiho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I agree that practical examples on examples on each would be
> great! I should try to get around doing an example with
> jdave-wicket-selenium.
I committed some additions to jdave-wicket-selenium trunk last week
and I'
On Thu, Jul 03, 2008 at 04:41:27AM -0700, richardwilko wrote:
>
> hi,
>
> I've used selenium in the past and I do like it. However it uses domIds
> quite a bit, and as these are autogenerated by wicket they can prove
> troublesome. For example, you might get a test working, then add a new
> com
using this to get the correct domids, but that
> didnt seem like a very good way of doing things.
>
> Richard
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://www.nabble.com/Functional-testing-tools-comparison-tp18241663p1
didnt seem like a very good way of doing things.
Richard
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Functional-testing-tools-comparison-tp18241663p18257390.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabbl
I've selenium tests running from maven here... basically it's easy to setup.
"Better Builds With Maven" suggests several ways to do functional tests,
they'd prefer to put the functional "integration" tests in a separate
module, but I had to keep them together in one module, so I followed the
a
no, I run them manually, from command line. I haven't got that thing set up,
though one of my colleagues have created something that integrated into
maven for work (I think).
We can see if selenium is the best fit for us, and then I can try to
integrate it into maven. It is doable, since we have t
Do you have them running from maven? Could we RC them onto our build server?
Martijn
On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 10:20 AM, Frank Bille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a test suite for selenium for the wicket examples, which I use to
> test with when releasing (or testing your release). In
Hi,
I have a test suite for selenium for the wicket examples, which I use to
test with when releasing (or testing your release). In that way I can
quickly test on IE6, IE7 (using vmware (2 pcs unfortunatly)), Firefox etc.
I can wrap them up and put them somewhere.
Frank
On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 6
On Wed, 02 Jul 2008, Martijn Dashorst wrote:
> I'm trying to discover which functional testing tool suits Wicket
> development best. My options are:
>
> - Canoo webtest
Haven't tried that but I and others have some good
experiences on HttpUnit / jWebUnit on which Canoo is based?
Or was at least
All,
I'm trying to discover which functional testing tool suits Wicket
development best. My options are:
- Canoo webtest
- Selenium
- Watir
I'd like some folks to create a couple of functional tests for our
wicket examples in one of these tools so that we get a complete
overview of all three
14 matches
Mail list logo
