The fork that I've been working on has changed a lot, especially with the firefox version. I should have included a link, sorry. My fork is at: http://github.com/ethan-medidata/watir Previous discussion of it started here: http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/wtr-development/2009-October/001227.html Other significant discussing has gone on in this thread: http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/wtr-development/2009-October/001230.html
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 16:54, marekj <[email protected]> wrote: > HI, I haven't been paying attention to your fork, but since I am > working on a some rdoc fix fork I want to clarify some things on my > style of thinking > > I like to think of changes as two classes of issues: > 1. impediments to overcome, pain to address (improve feature, fix bugs) > 2. setting up for next moves (infrastructure to support workflow, > future forks, features etc..) > > So I am also working on a fork to fix documentation and packaging of gems. > for example the impediments I want to address: > - update the rdoc and make it nice for watir, firewatir and commonwatir. > - make it work with yard (for rdoc.info and yardoc) > - remove unittests from gem package (not needed to be in gem since > they won't run, users complain) > > And for next moves are: > - move to jeweler for gemspec creation and packaging and version > management (we've already moved away from hoe) > - make some kind of demo, examples gem to run with watir, firewatir > etc.. and use a site so people can gem install watir and gem install > watirdemogemthing and just run it on their machines. > > there are more.. > > So I am not sure what your changing of class names addresses and > what's the reason for breaking existing functionality? > can you list the issues? > Do you have tests for them that show the reason why something is a certain > way? > This would help me and others I think to look at considering changes. > > > > > marekj > > Watirloo: Semantic Page Objects in UseCases > http://github.com/marekj/watirloo/ > Support Watir Project http://pledgie.com/campaigns/2982 > > > > On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 3:29 PM, Ethan <[email protected]> wrote: > > Dear Watir Development, > > > > I am wondering how people around here feel about my fork. It has been > some > > time, and I think it is much closer to being ready to be used by most > users. > > It has been in use by the SQA team at my company for quite a while now, > > though we don't use all of the functionality that the current Watir gem > > provides, some of which has been broken by my fork and I have been slow > to > > fix. > > At this point though, I think it's about ready - with a couple > significant > > exceptions of implementing changes discussed here relating to class names > > (changing Watir::IETextField to Watir::IE::TextField), and implementing > > something that works for interacting with modal dialogs/popups. > > > > So, with things approaching what I feel will soon be a ready state for > users > > to be using my work, I'd like feedback on the fork. Do people here feel > that > > my changes are something that could be merged into the main Watir > codebase? > > If so, what would need to be done with it for that to happen? If not, why > > not? (is anybody even paying any attention to it?) > > > > I hope to hear from those involved with watir, so I can figure out what > > direction to take my work as it forms into something really usable. > > > > Thanks, > > -Ethan > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Wtr-development mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/wtr-development > > > _______________________________________________ > Wtr-development mailing list > [email protected] > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/wtr-development >
_______________________________________________ Wtr-development mailing list [email protected] http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/wtr-development
