On 3. nov. 2009, at 05.30, Bret Pettichord wrote:

> Architecturally I want to make Watir more pluggable and easier for  
> people to create port/implementations for it. I think that adding a  
> WebDriver-based implemenation is one of the more important  
> approaches and therefore I strongly encourage the work you (Jari)  
> are planning to make with this. Charley and I have talked about this  
> being the right way to move for a couple of years now, so I'm really  
> happy to see your enthusiasm for it.
>
> At the same time, i think it will be a big project and will take  
> time and I don't have plans to drop everything else.

Sounds fine to me. I'll concentrate 100% of my Watir work on a  
WebDriver-based implementation and likely won't do any more work on  
the 1.6 code base. I've also created a watir2 branch of watirspec,  
which should be changed to describe the wanted behaviour of 2.0 - like  
changing the specs to use zero-based indices.

Before writing the WD ruby bindings, I went through most of the  
watirspec failures on IE (current HEAD), adding guards to the specs  
and creating issues in Jira. A lot of those will probably be resolved  
by Ethan's refactorings, but the list is a good starting point for  
making future 1.X better and more consistent. Specs failures that  
needs to be discussed are prefixed with "watirspec-pending". See 
http://jira.openqa.org/browse/WTR-336 
.

>
> We should probably set up a skype conference call to discuss these  
> issues.
>

Sounds like a good idea.

> Bret
>
> -- 
> Bret Pettichord
> Lead Developer, Watir, www.watir.com
>
> Blog, www.io.com/~wazmo/blog
> Twitter, www.twitter.com/bpettichord
>
> <ATT00001..txt>

_______________________________________________
Wtr-development mailing list
[email protected]
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/wtr-development

Reply via email to