Account Options

  1. Sign in
The old Google Groups will be going away soon, but your browser is incompatible with the new version.
Google Groups Home
« Groups Home
Which option is good for web testing.
There are currently too many topics in this group that display first. To make this topic appear first, remove this option from another topic.
There was an error processing your request. Please try again.
flag
  17 messages - Collapse all  -  Translate all to Translated (View all originals)
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
kalyan  
View profile  
 More options Jan 25 2012, 9:14 am
From: kalyan <solasakal...@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 06:14:51 -0800 (PST)
Local: Wed, Jan 25 2012 9:14 am
Subject: Which option is good for web testing.
I am trying to do test automation  of web application developed in
J2EE. Tried capybara and watir-webdriver. Have more options listed on
the website. Which option is good. Is there any place where
comparision of these options are provided, when to use which and
more.....

 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
aslak hellesoy  
View profile  
 More options Jan 25 2012, 10:11 am
From: aslak hellesoy <aslak.helle...@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 15:11:11 +0000
Local: Wed, Jan 25 2012 10:11 am
Subject: Re: [Cucumber:10132] Which option is good for web testing.

On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 2:14 PM, kalyan <solasakal...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I am trying to do test automation  of web application developed in
> J2EE. Tried capybara and watir-webdriver.

How did that work for you?

> Have more options listed on
> the website.

What URL are you referring to?

> Which option is good.

All browser automation libraries have their strengths and weaknesses,
so it's hard to answer your question unless you're more specific.

> Is there any place where
> comparision of these options are provided, when to use which and
> more.....

Not that I'm aware of.

Aslak


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
kalyan  
View profile  
 More options Jan 27 2012, 5:55 am
From: kalyan <solasakal...@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 02:55:50 -0800 (PST)
Local: Fri, Jan 27 2012 5:55 am
Subject: Re: Which option is good for web testing.

On Jan 25, 8:11 pm, aslak hellesoy <aslak.helle...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 2:14 PM, kalyan <solasakal...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I am trying to do test automation  of web application developed in
> > J2EE. Tried capybara and watir-webdriver.

> How did that work for you?

> > Have more options listed on
> > the website.

> What URL are you referring to?

https://github.com/cucumber/cucumber/wiki/ has options for web
application testing

> > Which option is good.

> All browser automation libraries have their strengths and weaknesses,
> so it's hard to answer your question unless you're more specific.

I am new and wanted to know how to approach the options. Which one to
use when?


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Miguel Almeida  
View profile  
 More options Jan 27 2012, 9:43 am
From: Miguel Almeida <migueldealme...@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 06:43:56 -0800 (PST)
Local: Fri, Jan 27 2012 9:43 am
Subject: Re: Which option is good for web testing.

I haven't used any test automation frameworks/helpers yet. On our new
project, we're trying out crawiling under the skin (essentially faking the
request and session) and we'll see how that goes. The only thing excluded
from this approach is the html and any business logic that might be in
javascript.


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Richard Lawrence  
View profile  
 More options Jan 27 2012, 10:13 am
From: Richard Lawrence <rich...@humanizingwork.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 10:13:41 -0500
Local: Fri, Jan 27 2012 10:13 am
Subject: Re: [Cucumber:10159] Re: Which option is good for web testing.
Selenium WebDriver seems to be the most widely-used web app driver, with Capybara the typical way to use WebDriver from Ruby. I've used Capybara against Rails, ASP.NET, and Java web apps, and it works great.

Richard


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
bis  
View profile  
 More options Jan 27 2012, 10:24 am
From: bis <bis...@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 10:24:06 -0500
Local: Fri, Jan 27 2012 10:24 am
Subject: Re: [Cucumber:10163] Re: Which option is good for web testing.

I personally prefer watir-webdriver or selenium-webdriver over capybara, I
think the key to making it work is to create a good page object framework
around your application, there are a few gems out there that help you do
this. and plenty of stuff on the web.

Thanks
Oscar

On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 10:13 AM, Richard Lawrence <


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Max  
View profile  
 More options Jan 28 2012, 4:18 am
From: Max <max.s...@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2012 01:18:16 -0800 (PST)
Local: Sat, Jan 28 2012 4:18 am
Subject: Re: Which option is good for web testing.

> there are a few gems out there that help you do
> this. and plenty of stuff on the web.

Would you be able to list few here? Thanks

On Jan 27, 7:24 am, bis <bis...@gmail.com> wrote:


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
bis  
View profile  
 More options Jan 30 2012, 1:37 pm
From: bis <bis...@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2012 13:37:50 -0500
Local: Mon, Jan 30 2012 1:37 pm
Subject: Re: [Cucumber:10177] Re: Which option is good for web testing.

of course ill mention
Taza https://github.com/hammernight/taza

these are some other dont know if they are still applicable or not
watir-page-helper https://github.com/alisterscott/watir-page-helper
page-object https://github.com/cheezy/page-object
watirloo https://github.com/marekj/watirloo
seleniumFury https://github.com/scottcsims/SeleniumFury


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Matt Wynne  
View profile  
 More options Jan 30 2012, 5:06 pm
From: Matt Wynne <m...@mattwynne.net>
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2012 22:06:40 +0000
Local: Mon, Jan 30 2012 5:06 pm
Subject: Re: [Cucumber:10182] Which option is good for web testing.

For me, choosing a browser automation library is quite simple:

If I'm writing step definitions in Ruby, I choose Capybara. If I need to, I can reach down beneath Capybara's sweet DSL to the underlying Selenium Webdriver API.
If I'm writing step definitions in C#, I choose Coypu. If I need to, I can reach down beneath Coypu's sweet DSL to the underlying Selenium Webdriver API.

The underlying Selenium Libraries are amazingly powerful, but also result in more verbose test code. Capybara and Coypu are well tested, robust and well maintained libraries, and I love using them.

I don't know about Java - is there an equivalent library to Capybara for Java?

On 30 Jan 2012, at 18:37, bis wrote:

cheers,
Matt

--
Freelance programmer & coach
Author, http://pragprog.com/book/hwcuc/the-cucumber-book
Founder, http://www.relishapp.com/
Twitter, https://twitter.com/mattwynne


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Aslak Hellesøy  
View profile  
 More options Jan 30 2012, 5:52 pm
From: Aslak Hellesøy <aslak.helle...@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2012 22:52:52 +0000
Local: Mon, Jan 30 2012 5:52 pm
Subject: Re: [Cucumber:10186] Which option is good for web testing.

On Jan 30, 2012, at 22:06, Matt Wynne <m...@mattwynne.net> wrote:

For me, choosing a browser automation library is quite simple:

If I'm writing step definitions in Ruby, I choose Capybara. If I need to, I
can reach down beneath Capybara's sweet DSL to the underlying Selenium
Webdriver API.
If I'm writing step definitions in C#, I choose Coypu. If I need to, I can
reach down beneath Coypu's sweet DSL to the underlying Selenium Webdriver
API.

The underlying Selenium Libraries are amazingly powerful, but also result
in more verbose test code. Capybara and Coypu are well tested, robust and
well maintained libraries, and I love using them.

I don't know about Java - is there an equivalent library to Capybara for
Java?

Absolutely. It's called Selenium WebDriver and it's rock solid.

Aslak

On 30 Jan 2012, at 18:37, bis wrote:

of course ill mention
Taza https://github.com/hammernight/taza

these are some other dont know if they are still applicable or not
watir-page-helper https://github.com/alisterscott/watir-page-helper
page-object https://github.com/cheezy/page-object
watirloo https://github.com/marekj/watirloo
seleniumFury https://github.com/scottcsims/SeleniumFury

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Cukes" group.
To post to this group, send email to cukes@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
cukes+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/cukes?hl=en.

cheers,
Matt

--
Freelance programmer & coach
Author, http://pragprog.com/book/hwcuc/the-cucumber-book
Founder, http://www.relishapp.com/
Twitter, https://twitter.com/mattwynne

 --
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Cukes" group.
To post to this group, send email to cukes@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
cukes+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/cukes?hl=en.


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Matt Wynne  
View profile  
 More options Jan 31 2012, 12:19 am
From: Matt Wynne <m...@mattwynne.net>
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 05:19:38 +0000
Local: Tues, Jan 31 2012 12:19 am
Subject: Re: [Cucumber:10187] Which option is good for web testing.

On 30 Jan 2012, at 22:52, Aslak Hellesøy wrote:

But is there a sweeter DSL on top of it?

cheers,
Matt

--
Freelance programmer & coach
Author, http://pragprog.com/book/hwcuc/the-cucumber-book
Founder, http://www.relishapp.com/
Twitter, https://twitter.com/mattwynne


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Aslak Hellesøy  
View profile  
 More options Jan 31 2012, 2:06 am
From: Aslak Hellesøy <aslak.helle...@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 07:06:17 +0000
Local: Tues, Jan 31 2012 2:06 am
Subject: Re: [Cucumber:10189] Which option is good for web testing.

On Jan 31, 2012, at 5:19, Matt Wynne <m...@mattwynne.net> wrote:

On 30 Jan 2012, at 22:52, Aslak Hellesøy wrote:

On Jan 30, 2012, at 22:06, Matt Wynne <m...@mattwynne.net> wrote:

For me, choosing a browser automation library is quite simple:

If I'm writing step definitions in Ruby, I choose Capybara. If I need to, I
can reach down beneath Capybara's sweet DSL to the underlying Selenium
Webdriver API.
If I'm writing step definitions in C#, I choose Coypu. If I need to, I can
reach down beneath Coypu's sweet DSL to the underlying Selenium Webdriver
API.

The underlying Selenium Libraries are amazingly powerful, but also result
in more verbose test code. Capybara and Coypu are well tested, robust and
well maintained libraries, and I love using them.

I don't know about Java - is there an equivalent library to Capybara for
Java?

Absolutely. It's called Selenium WebDriver and it's rock solid.

But is there a sweeter DSL on top of it?

Not that I know of, and I'm mot sure I see the need for it.

Aslak

On 30 Jan 2012, at 18:37, bis wrote:

of course ill mention
Taza https://github.com/hammernight/taza

these are some other dont know if they are still applicable or not
watir-page-helper https://github.com/alisterscott/watir-page-helper
page-object https://github.com/cheezy/page-object
watirloo https://github.com/marekj/watirloo
seleniumFury https://github.com/scottcsims/SeleniumFury

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Cukes" group.
To post to this group, send email to cukes@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
cukes+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/cukes?hl=en.

    cheers,
Matt

--
Freelance programmer & coach
Author, http://pragprog.com/book/hwcuc/the-cucumber-book
Founder, http://www.relishapp.com/
Twitter, https://twitter.com/mattwynne

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Cukes" group.
To post to this group, send email to cukes@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
cukes+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/cukes?hl=en.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Cukes" group.
To post to this group, send email to cukes@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
cukes+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/cukes?hl=en.

cheers,
Matt

--
Freelance programmer & coach
Author, http://pragprog.com/book/hwcuc/the-cucumber-book
Founder, http://www.relishapp.com/
Twitter, https://twitter.com/mattwynne

 --
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Cukes" group.
To post to this group, send email to cukes@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
cukes+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/cukes?hl=en.


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Adrian Longley  
View profile  
 More options Jan 31 2012, 2:05 pm
From: Adrian Longley <adrianlong...@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 19:05:00 +0000
Subject: Re: [Cucumber:10190] Which option is good for web testing.

On 31 Jan 2012, at 07:06, Aslak Hellesøy wrote:

I am working on a Java port of Coypu (little way off still)

> Not that I know of, and I'm mot sure I see the need for it.

I suppose this depends on the nature of the site you are testing to some degree, but my experiences using both Capybara and native Selenium WebDriver against ajax-heavy sites was that I got to working, robust tests so much faster and with so much less code with Capybara.

In my experience of teams using WebDriver is that while what WebDriver can do is an utterly awesome, it's API is rather low level and test code tends to end up littered with xpath expressions, element ids and explicit (or implicit) waits and retries to map user lanuguage - such as you might find in cucumber steps - to the actual HTML/JS implementation of the UX.

In particular tests end up being coupled to the structure of the markup/css. Capybara's API helps you express your tests in a language much closer to the way a real user would making tests more tolerant of changes to the structure of the markup, ids etc. For example the forms API is awesome in how it uses label text to identify elements:

choose("Radio button label text")
fill_in("Label text").with("your value")
select("Option text / option value").from("Label text / name / id")

While WebDriver does have implicit waits, Capybara and Coypu also go a bit further to make tests robust. If you follow the WebDriver list you will see countless emails from users struggling with inconsistent stale element exceptions, or element not visible exceptions which are not handled by implicit waits. Everyone has their own strategy for dealing with this.

Coypu in particular will catch and retry on any WebDriver exception up to the defined timeout, making it very tolerant of changes to the DOM such as areas of the page reloading in response to AJAX requests, async javascript animating things in/out and so on.

I'm sure excellent test suites can be written with native WebDriver, but not in my opinion without solving these issues one way or another, and Capybara & Coypu certainly offer you a good head start in that direction.

Adrian

A good page object framework is certainly going to make your steps more readable, but it is still less than ideal to have page objects that are coupled directly to the UX in any case, no matter how well factored they are. I'm pretty sure Capybara would still help you implement your page objects more easily and give you more loosely coupled, more robust tests.

...

read more »


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Matt Wynne  
View profile  
 More options Feb 1 2012, 6:28 am
From: Matt Wynne <m...@mattwynne.net>
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2012 11:28:55 +0000
Local: Wed, Feb 1 2012 6:28 am
Subject: Re: [Cucumber:10194] Which option is good for web testing.

On 31 Jan 2012, at 19:05, Adrian Longley wrote:

> I am working on a Java port of Coypu (little way off still)

Interesting! Great work on Coypu by the way, I've used it with a couple of .NET teams and we all love it.

cheers,
Matt

--
Freelance programmer & coach
Author, http://pragprog.com/book/hwcuc/the-cucumber-book
Founder, http://www.relishapp.com/
Twitter, https://twitter.com/mattwynne


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Miguel Almeida  
View profile  
 More options Feb 4 2012, 10:46 am
From: Miguel Almeida <migueldealme...@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 4 Feb 2012 15:46:44 +0000
Local: Sat, Feb 4 2012 10:46 am
Subject: Re: [Cucumber:10248] Which option is good for web testing.

Do you guys use web testing frameworks extensively though?

I tend to agree with Gojko Adzic (
http://gojko.net/2010/04/13/how-to-implement-ui-testing-without-shoot...
it's very easy to create very bad UI tests that become brittle and a
nightmare to maintain on the long run, especially if they are written in a
script format (eg: 1. login 2. go to products page 3. write "playstation"
in the search box 4. confirm result has at least 1 product).

On our most recent project we have avoided UI tests and test under the skin
of the application.
I am interested in knowing if you guys disagree with this, and if you
regularly write tests "above the skin" that don't shoot yourself in the
foot and make you want to disable them when you decide to change your
interface.

Miguel Almeida


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Matt Wynne  
View profile  
 More options Feb 6 2012, 1:32 pm
From: Matt Wynne <m...@mattwynne.net>
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2012 18:32:21 +0000
Local: Mon, Feb 6 2012 1:32 pm
Subject: Re: [Cucumber:10234] Which option is good for web testing.

On 4 Feb 2012, at 15:46, Miguel Almeida wrote:

> Do you guys use web testing frameworks extensively though?

> I tend to agree with Gojko Adzic (http://gojko.net/2010/04/13/how-to-implement-ui-testing-without-shoot... it's very easy to create very bad UI tests that become brittle and a nightmare to maintain on the long run, especially if they are written in a script format (eg: 1. login 2. go to products page 3. write "playstation" in the search box 4. confirm result has at least 1 product).

> On our most recent project we have avoided UI tests and test under the skin of the application.
> I am interested in knowing if you guys disagree with this, and if you regularly write tests "above the skin" that don't shoot yourself in the foot and make you want to disable them when you decide to change your interface.

Here's what I have to say on this:
http://skillsmatter.com/podcast/agile-scrum/bdd-as-its-meant-to-be-done

cheers,
Matt

--
Freelance programmer & coach
Author, http://pragprog.com/book/hwcuc/the-cucumber-book
Founder, http://www.relishapp.com/
Twitter, https://twitter.com/mattwynne


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Richard Paul  
View profile  
 More options Feb 7 2012, 5:17 pm
From: Richard Paul <richard.a.p...@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2012 14:17:46 -0800 (PST)
Local: Tues, Feb 7 2012 5:17 pm
Subject: Re: Which option is good for web testing.
For those looking for sweet DSLs on top of WebDriver, Geb provides a
pretty nice jQuery-ish DSL for Groovy. It also supports the page
object pattern.
http://www.gebish.org/

On Feb 7, 7:32 am, Matt Wynne <m...@mattwynne.net> wrote:


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
End of messages
« Back to Discussions « Newer topic     Older topic »