Hi Thomas, which version of WebTest do you use? Have you tried with the latest build?
Marc. Kappen, Thomas, TECON Terenci wrote: > Hi Marc, > > I have tried to implement the groovy script snippets in my test. But that did > not work: > > webtest doesn't support the nested "groovyScript" element. > webtest doesn't support the nested "groovy" element. > > According to the WebTest.dtd, this message is correct. The <groovyScript> and > <groovy> element are not defined. > > > Can you help? > > > Cheers, > Thomas > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Marc Guillemot [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Donnerstag, 1. März 2007 16:26 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [Webtest] RE: [dev] Best way to extend WebTest configuration > possibilities > > > Hi Thomas, > > (b) may be badly documented, (c) is in the javadoc but would require a > dedicated documentation page (cf WT-240) and (d) is quite good documented. > > first a quick workaround could be as first step of your <webTest>: > <groovy> > step.context.webClient.pageCreator = new MyCustomPageCreator() > </groovy> > > To make my idea more explicit, here is an example how this could look like > once it is available: somewhere in your ant script you would just need > something like > <groovyScript> > project.references['webtest.hotspot.pageCreator'] = new > MyCustomPageCreator() > /groovyScript> > > or > > <groovyScript> > class MyCustomPageCreator extends DefaultPageCreator > { > ... > } > > project.references['webtest.hotspot.pageCreator'] = new > MyCustomPageCreator() > </groovyScript> > > and this page creator would be available for ALL webtest tests for which > this project is visible. > > If you want to provide a patch to make this working I would add later a > mechanism to extract documentation for it. > > Concerning your file extension patch, please open a new issue for it and > attach it there. > > Marc. > > > Kappen, Thomas, TECON Terenci wrote: >> Hi Marc, >> >> please forgive the response to your suggestions. But I'm occupied by the >> projects in our office. >> >> >> Your proposal to solve the issue does make sense. Sadly, I'm not >> familiar with the configuration options b, c, and d. And I'm afraid they >> are not documented very well. Actually, I didn't find any information >> about these options on the projects home page. >> >> If you implement the issue as you proposed, can you give me a sample >> script/code how to use a custom PageCreator, please? >> >> Subsequently, another minor issue pops up. XHTML responses will be >> logged as xml files. It would be nicer, if they would be logged with the >> .html extension (see the attached patch). >> >> Kind Regards, >> Thomas >> >> >> PS: When do you plan the next release of Canoo WebTest? >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Marc Guillemot [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: Donnerstag, 22. Februar 2007 13:47 >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Subject: [Webtest] [dev] Best way to extend WebTest configuration >> possibilities >> >> Hi, >> >> currently we have basically 4 kinds of possibilities to configure >> WebTest: >> (a) using one of the existing <config> attributes >> (b) using a System property (like webtest.connectioninitializer) >> (c) calling a static helper method like XPathHelper.registerGlobalXxxx >> (d) using a script step within <webtest> to configure the running test >> >> WT-270 (http://webtest-community.canoo.com/jira/browse/WT-270) contains >> a patch from Thomas Kappen following way (a) to allow to specify the >> class name of a custom PageCreator. This way is fully valid but first I >> fear that too many configuration options have the same right to belong >> to config than PageCreator. Second this requires having the custom class >> >> present in the classpath. >> >> What about defining a key like "webtest.hotspot.pageCreator" and using >> it to look in Project's reference map for a customized entry? (for info: >> >> an Ant Project can contain references to any kind of objects in this >> map) WebTest could look at it during configuration and use the page >> creator it finds there if any. Major advantage: it would be possible to >> define a custom page creator on the fly with for instance a small Groovy >> >> script. This strategy could be used for other extension points. The only >> >> "issue" here concern the documentation. I can imagine adding new xdoclet >> >> tags to generate this documentation automatically and to keep it >> accurate. >> >> Any thoughts? >> >> Marc. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> WebTest mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.canoo.com/mailman/listinfo/webtest >> >> >> >> > _______________________________________________ WebTest mailing list [email protected] http://lists.canoo.com/mailman/listinfo/webtest
