RE: openSTA - WAS RE: [Webtest] load tests with WebTest - Jeffrey D. Brekke - com.canoo.lists.webtest

8 messages in com.canoo.lists.webtestRE: openSTA - WAS RE: [Webtest] load ...

From	Sent On	Attachments
Goeschl Siegfried	14 Jan 2003 00:53
Christian Sell	14 Jan 2003 04:38
Bernhard Wagner	14 Jan 2003 05:23
Christian Sell	14 Jan 2003 06:05
Goeschl Siegfried	14 Jan 2003 06:29
Bernhard Wagner	15 Jan 2003 10:34
Jeffrey D. Brekke	15 Jan 2003 10:41
Christian Sell	15 Jan 2003 10:44

Subject:	RE: openSTA - WAS RE: [Webtest] load tests with WebTest
From:	Jeffrey D. Brekke (jbre...@wi.rr.com)
Date:	01/15/2003 10:41:00 AM
List:	com.canoo.lists.webtest

FWIW I believe there is a move to allow jelly to run ant build scripts right out and currently any ant task may be used in a jelly script. So in the case of webtest, the ant task may be used as is in a jelly script.

On Wed, 15 Jan 2003, Bernhard Wagner wrote:

Migrating the ANT scripts.... since they are XML and jelly is XML it might be possible to develop an XSLT to migrate them. The reason I'd find it interesting to use jelly instead of ant is that I would like to script http sessions as easily as I can with webtest, but not primarily for testing purposes. Also, I see ANT as a highly targeted build programming language, while Jelly looks more like a general purpose programming language incorporating Testing utilities natively. But I'm probably drifting off-topic.

Thanks for your thoughts, Sigi, and Christian.

Bernhard

-----Original Message----- From: webt...@lists.canoo.com [mailto:webt...@lists.canoo.com]On Behalf Of Goeschl Siegfried Sent: Dienstag, 14. Januar 2003 15:30 To: webt...@lists.canoo.com Subject: RE: openSTA - WAS RE: [Webtest] load tests with WebTest

Using Jelly would give the advantage of having a full blown programming language at hand whereas scripting with ANT is always limited .... I just added a few ANT task with a "if" and "unless" clause. And iw would be quite easy to embed Canoo Webtest as Jelly Tag library ... :-)

The downside is the Jelly is, well, hard to use sometimes and a little bit buggy. I still haven't figured out complex if statements yet. Last but not least you still have to support the existing ANT integration .... nobodyis keen to migrate tons of ANT scripts

Sigi

-----Original Message----- From: Christian Sell [mailto:chri...@netcologne.de] Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2003 3:06 PM To: webt...@gate.canoo.com Subject: Re: openSTA - WAS RE: [Webtest] load tests with WebTest

hmm, Jelly is one of those animals that I am still having a hard time figuring out (is that what the name indicates?).

I suppose in this case Jelly would take the place of ANT, right? What would be the advantages?

Bernhard Wagner wrote:

BTW what do you people think of Jelly ? (http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/sandbox/jelly/)

What are your opinions seeing Jelly as a candidate to host WebTest? One problem might be that httpunit and HttpClient (which is used by Jelly) are somewhat competing in functionality.

Bernhard

-----Original Message----- From: webt...@lists.canoo.com [mailto:webt...@lists.canoo.com]On Behalf Of Christian Sell Sent: Dienstag, 14. Januar 2003 13:39 To: webt...@gate.canoo.com Subject: Re: openSTA - WAS RE: [Webtest] load tests with WebTest

thats the beauty of HttpUnit/WebTest: I can tell it to "click on the link which includes the String XXX". It will then parse the response and find the appropriate link (including dynamically generated parameters) and create a request from it - just as if a user clicked on it. No issues with session Ids and the like... Only drawback is I have no recording facility