RE: [Webtest] Better way to integrate users' proposed steps - Dierk Koenig - com.canoo.lists.webtest

2 messages in com.canoo.lists.webtestRE: [Webtest] Better way to integrate...

From	Sent On	Attachments
Marc Guillemot	16 Oct 2003 00:47
Dierk Koenig	16 Oct 2003 04:43

Subject:	RE: [Webtest] Better way to integrate users' proposed steps
From:	Dierk Koenig (dier...@canoo.com)
Date:	10/16/2003 04:43:13 AM
List:	com.canoo.lists.webtest

Hi,

I see the value of the proposal. We would already have the "extensions" package, where such contributions could live in.

Having two levels of quality makes me feel a little bit uncomfortable. I would rather prefer to put extension steps somewhere outside the Canoo Webtest distribution, like sourceforge or tigris.

cheers Mittie

BTW: I will be away the next two weeks.

-----Original Message----- From: webt...@lists.canoo.com [mailto:webt...@lists.canoo.com]On Behalf Of Marc Guillemot Sent: Donnerstag, 16. Oktober 2003 9:48 To: webt...@lists.canoo.com Subject: [Webtest] Better way to integrate users' proposed steps

A proposotion to find a better way to integrate users' proposed steps

----- New steps posted in this list get lost

Users post new steps (the last was Matt Raible's <sleep> step on 08.10.2003) in this mailing list but they don't get integrated. I guess as well that other users have written some custom steps that are working well for their own needs. All this work does not benefit to the community.

Webtest standard

Even if I'm now a committer, I can't integrate rapidly something like the <sleep> step as it would require to write unit and functional tests to respect the library standard. It takes time and it's not always so easy.

Add a "contribution" package

I think that this quality policy is good and should stay the rule. But we could add something like a com.canoo.webtest.steps.contrib package to provide a way to incorporate new steps that don't (yet) fit in the standard. Theses steps wouldn't aim to stay in the contrib package but should be refactored and moved to the "normal" packages when someone takes time/finds a way to write appropriate functional and unit tests.

I think that, with such a facility, the number of avalaible steps will rapidly increase (personnally I've some steps like verifyimages, extractlinkparameter, enablejavascript, ... waiting that I take time/find a way to write the appropriate functional and unit tests before beeing incorporated).

If we decide to use such a way, we should document what is needed to accept a new step. I see: - the step class - the description of the step action and of it's attributes (name, description, required) (we could use xdoclet to generate the doc from the java files) - a code sample

Waiting for comments...

Marc.