[xwiki-devs] [VOTE] Start using Selenium2 in XE's functional tests
Hi devs, Jerome and I have explored using Selenium2 (see http://xwiki.markmail.org/thread/cqbxdmhqdi36kovn) The code is in http://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/contrib/sandbox/webdriver-ui-tests/ I'd like to propose to: * Move the code in http://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/enterprise/trunk/distribution-test/ui-tes... * Agree that from now on *new* UI functional tests are written using Selenium2 * Slowly migrate current functional tests over time (I have almost finished migrating the login/logout tests for ex) * Use the PageObject pattern as shown in the existing tests in http://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/enterprise/trunk/distribution-test/ui-tes... The pros to use selenium2 are those listed in http://xwiki.markmail.org/thread/cqbxdmhqdi36kovn: * No more JS sandbox. In selenium1 all the selenium API is executed as JS in the browser. In Selenium2 the browsers are controlled using their native APIs (JNA). * Faster (as a consequence of the previous point) * Allows to do stuff such as file uploads, etc since there's no longer the issue of the JS sandbox * No need to start a Selenium Proxy. All you need is to start XE and then you can run the tests as simple JUnit tests. * The API is much cleaner (this is to be expected with hindsight). See http://seleniumhq.org/docs/09_webdriver.html * There's a very fast executing HtmlUnit driver (not to be used with tests using JS though since it emulates browser JS support and thus cannot guarantee the result in the real browser) Caveat: * Selenium2 is still quite young so it's possible that there are cases when it'll have bugs or be instable. We should still allow using selenium1 tests when this happens. Note: I have configured hudson to run the selenium2 tests from the sandbox to see how stable it is. Here's my +1 Thanks -Vincent
+1. JV. On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 6:16 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi devs,
Jerome and I have explored using Selenium2 (see http://xwiki.markmail.org/thread/cqbxdmhqdi36kovn)
The code is in http://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/contrib/sandbox/webdriver-ui-tests/
I'd like to propose to:
* Move the code in http://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/enterprise/trunk/distribution-test/ui-tes... * Agree that from now on *new* UI functional tests are written using Selenium2 * Slowly migrate current functional tests over time (I have almost finished migrating the login/logout tests for ex) * Use the PageObject pattern as shown in the existing tests in http://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/enterprise/trunk/distribution-test/ui-tes...
The pros to use selenium2 are those listed in http://xwiki.markmail.org/thread/cqbxdmhqdi36kovn:
* No more JS sandbox. In selenium1 all the selenium API is executed as JS in the browser. In Selenium2 the browsers are controlled using their native APIs (JNA). * Faster (as a consequence of the previous point) * Allows to do stuff such as file uploads, etc since there's no longer the issue of the JS sandbox * No need to start a Selenium Proxy. All you need is to start XE and then you can run the tests as simple JUnit tests. * The API is much cleaner (this is to be expected with hindsight). See http://seleniumhq.org/docs/09_webdriver.html * There's a very fast executing HtmlUnit driver (not to be used with tests using JS though since it emulates browser JS support and thus cannot guarantee the result in the real browser)
Caveat:
* Selenium2 is still quite young so it's possible that there are cases when it'll have bugs or be instable. We should still allow using selenium1 tests when this happens.
Note: I have configured hudson to run the selenium2 tests from the sandbox to see how stable it is.
Here's my +1
Thanks -Vincent
_______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
+1 Thanks, Marius Vincent Massol wrote:
Hi devs,
Jerome and I have explored using Selenium2 (see http://xwiki.markmail.org/thread/cqbxdmhqdi36kovn)
The code is in http://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/contrib/sandbox/webdriver-ui-tests/
I'd like to propose to:
* Move the code in http://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/enterprise/trunk/distribution-test/ui-tes... * Agree that from now on *new* UI functional tests are written using Selenium2 * Slowly migrate current functional tests over time (I have almost finished migrating the login/logout tests for ex) * Use the PageObject pattern as shown in the existing tests in http://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/enterprise/trunk/distribution-test/ui-tes...
The pros to use selenium2 are those listed in http://xwiki.markmail.org/thread/cqbxdmhqdi36kovn:
* No more JS sandbox. In selenium1 all the selenium API is executed as JS in the browser. In Selenium2 the browsers are controlled using their native APIs (JNA). * Faster (as a consequence of the previous point) * Allows to do stuff such as file uploads, etc since there's no longer the issue of the JS sandbox * No need to start a Selenium Proxy. All you need is to start XE and then you can run the tests as simple JUnit tests. * The API is much cleaner (this is to be expected with hindsight). See http://seleniumhq.org/docs/09_webdriver.html * There's a very fast executing HtmlUnit driver (not to be used with tests using JS though since it emulates browser JS support and thus cannot guarantee the result in the real browser)
Caveat:
* Selenium2 is still quite young so it's possible that there are cases when it'll have bugs or be instable. We should still allow using selenium1 tests when this happens.
Note: I have configured hudson to run the selenium2 tests from the sandbox to see how stable it is.
Here's my +1
Thanks -Vincent
_______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
+1 I wonder if javascript can be disabled programmatically, that would be very cool. I just finished a selenium 1.0 comment test I'd like to slip through the closing door if I can. Caleb Vincent Massol wrote:
Hi devs,
Jerome and I have explored using Selenium2 (see http://xwiki.markmail.org/thread/cqbxdmhqdi36kovn)
The code is in http://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/contrib/sandbox/webdriver-ui-tests/
I'd like to propose to:
* Move the code in http://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/enterprise/trunk/distribution-test/ui-tes... * Agree that from now on *new* UI functional tests are written using Selenium2 * Slowly migrate current functional tests over time (I have almost finished migrating the login/logout tests for ex) * Use the PageObject pattern as shown in the existing tests in http://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/enterprise/trunk/distribution-test/ui-tes...
The pros to use selenium2 are those listed in http://xwiki.markmail.org/thread/cqbxdmhqdi36kovn:
* No more JS sandbox. In selenium1 all the selenium API is executed as JS in the browser. In Selenium2 the browsers are controlled using their native APIs (JNA). * Faster (as a consequence of the previous point) * Allows to do stuff such as file uploads, etc since there's no longer the issue of the JS sandbox * No need to start a Selenium Proxy. All you need is to start XE and then you can run the tests as simple JUnit tests. * The API is much cleaner (this is to be expected with hindsight). See http://seleniumhq.org/docs/09_webdriver.html * There's a very fast executing HtmlUnit driver (not to be used with tests using JS though since it emulates browser JS support and thus cannot guarantee the result in the real browser)
Caveat:
* Selenium2 is still quite young so it's possible that there are cases when it'll have bugs or be instable. We should still allow using selenium1 tests when this happens.
Note: I have configured hudson to run the selenium2 tests from the sandbox to see how stable it is.
Here's my +1
Thanks -Vincent
_______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
On Mar 3, 2010, at 8:05 AM, Caleb James DeLisle wrote:
+1 I wonder if javascript can be disabled programmatically, that would be very cool.
If you want to test some functional tests without JS, it's easy to do by using for example the HtmlUnit driver (which has JS off by default). Thanks -Vincent
I just finished a selenium 1.0 comment test I'd like to slip through the closing door if I can.
Caleb
Vincent Massol wrote:
Hi devs,
Jerome and I have explored using Selenium2 (see http://xwiki.markmail.org/thread/cqbxdmhqdi36kovn)
The code is in http://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/contrib/sandbox/webdriver-ui-tests/
I'd like to propose to:
* Move the code in http://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/enterprise/trunk/distribution-test/ui-tes... * Agree that from now on *new* UI functional tests are written using Selenium2 * Slowly migrate current functional tests over time (I have almost finished migrating the login/logout tests for ex) * Use the PageObject pattern as shown in the existing tests in http://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/enterprise/trunk/distribution-test/ui-tes...
The pros to use selenium2 are those listed in http://xwiki.markmail.org/thread/cqbxdmhqdi36kovn:
* No more JS sandbox. In selenium1 all the selenium API is executed as JS in the browser. In Selenium2 the browsers are controlled using their native APIs (JNA). * Faster (as a consequence of the previous point) * Allows to do stuff such as file uploads, etc since there's no longer the issue of the JS sandbox * No need to start a Selenium Proxy. All you need is to start XE and then you can run the tests as simple JUnit tests. * The API is much cleaner (this is to be expected with hindsight). See http://seleniumhq.org/docs/09_webdriver.html * There's a very fast executing HtmlUnit driver (not to be used with tests using JS though since it emulates browser JS support and thus cannot guarantee the result in the real browser)
Caveat:
* Selenium2 is still quite young so it's possible that there are cases when it'll have bugs or be instable. We should still allow using selenium1 tests when this happens.
Note: I have configured hudson to run the selenium2 tests from the sandbox to see how stable it is.
Here's my +1
Thanks -Vincent
_______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
_______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
Result: 4 +1, no 0, no -1 The vote is passed and since the hudson build has been stable for about 10 builds I'll move the module from sandbox to enterprise/. Thanks -Vincent On Mar 2, 2010, at 6:16 PM, Vincent Massol wrote:
Hi devs,
Jerome and I have explored using Selenium2 (see http://xwiki.markmail.org/thread/cqbxdmhqdi36kovn)
The code is in http://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/contrib/sandbox/webdriver-ui-tests/
I'd like to propose to:
* Move the code in http://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/enterprise/trunk/distribution-test/ui-tes... * Agree that from now on *new* UI functional tests are written using Selenium2 * Slowly migrate current functional tests over time (I have almost finished migrating the login/logout tests for ex) * Use the PageObject pattern as shown in the existing tests in http://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/enterprise/trunk/distribution-test/ui-tes...
The pros to use selenium2 are those listed in http://xwiki.markmail.org/thread/cqbxdmhqdi36kovn:
* No more JS sandbox. In selenium1 all the selenium API is executed as JS in the browser. In Selenium2 the browsers are controlled using their native APIs (JNA). * Faster (as a consequence of the previous point) * Allows to do stuff such as file uploads, etc since there's no longer the issue of the JS sandbox * No need to start a Selenium Proxy. All you need is to start XE and then you can run the tests as simple JUnit tests. * The API is much cleaner (this is to be expected with hindsight). See http://seleniumhq.org/docs/09_webdriver.html * There's a very fast executing HtmlUnit driver (not to be used with tests using JS though since it emulates browser JS support and thus cannot guarantee the result in the real browser)
Caveat:
* Selenium2 is still quite young so it's possible that there are cases when it'll have bugs or be instable. We should still allow using selenium1 tests when this happens.
Note: I have configured hudson to run the selenium2 tests from the sandbox to see how stable it is.
Here's my +1
Thanks -Vincent
participants (4)
-
Caleb James DeLisle -
Jean-Vincent Drean -
Marius Dumitru Florea -
Vincent Massol