I agree that it would be great if we had a way to log all of the watir driver actions. I've thought about doing this for years but have never really had the need for it, and it is non-trivial to implement (although the refactoring i've done shouldn't make this any harder to do).
If Alister's question is whether people would like to have this level of logging embedded in Watir, then I think that is a fair question, and my guess would be that the answer would be yes. Another question would be who wants to do it? Not simple. Bret Paul Rogers wrote: > when I put the original logger in to watir, I really only intended it > to get overwritten by a plugged in logger, but this unfortunately > caused a lot of confusion. Probably cos the way I implemented it wasnt > the best. > A common thing is for people to want to log that they are clicking a > certain link ( or button etc ), so its definitely useful for the main > watir methods to be able to log this info, but with the merge and > refactoring that Bret has been doing it may be much harder to do. > > So, what Im really saying is that its nice for the Watir browser > drivers to be able to log their actions, but shouldnt force users to > use that mechanism completely. > > Paul > > On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 8:50 AM, Bret Pettichord <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > > > I think you've misunderstood some comments that I made. > > Someone pointed out that the WatirLogger was in Watir but not in > FireWatir. In response, I suggest that instead of putting it in > both, we > remove it. Here is the code in question: > > class WatirLogger < Logger > def initialize(filName, logsToKeep, maxLogSize) > super(filName, logsToKeep, maxLogSize) > self.level = Logger::DEBUG > self.datetime_format = "%d-%b-%Y %H:%M:%S" > self.debug("Watir starting") > end > end > > My point was that it is vestigial. The Watir browser drivers don't > use it. > > My view is that this should be treated as example framework code, > not as > part of Watir. To me, this is just an example of how to use the Logger > class and in fact obscures the fact that it is really a fully featured > logger by making you think it is a special Watir logger. > > I agree that logging is an important part of a testing framework. But > Watir isn't a framework. It is just a browser driver. > > Can you clarify what you mean by "a generic logger embedded in Watir"? > To me what we have right now is "a generic logger embedded in Ruby > that > is made to look like it is part of Watir but really isn't". Are you > suggesting that you'd like to see it truly embedded in Watir? > > I do think there is a need for a standard testing framework for Watir > that includes logging. But i see that as a completely different > question. > > Bret > > Alister Scott wrote: > > There has been some discussion lately about whether to continue to > > include any logging functionality in the Watir library. > > > > I understand that it's not really a core part of Watir > functionality, > > but IMO I believe it may be useful to Watir users. > > > > If you were new to Watir and you compared it to commercial offerings > > (QTP/WR/RFT etc.), then you would quickly find that all the > commercial > > tools have a logger in built. > > > > If a newbie picked up Watir if would be nice if they could just turn > > logging on (or off). > > > > I am interested in the thoughts of the community surrounding the > > usefulness of a generic logger embedded in Watir. > > > > Cheers, > > Alister > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Watir General" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] Before posting, please read the following guidelines: http://wiki.openqa.org/display/WTR/Support To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/watir-general -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
