Cucumber-jvm vs. Jbehave or Concordian
Adam Yuret
I am more familiar with Cucumber in general but apart from that I wondered if maybe JBehave or Concordian might be easier to integrate into our nascent framework.
Cheers,
On 10/17/2011 02:11 PM, aslak hellesoy wrote:Sorry, I didn't mean to mislead, to be honest, I don't either. I've used
> On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 8:09 PM, David Kowis <dko...@shlrm.org> wrote:
>> On 10/17/2011 01:41 PM, aslak hellesoy wrote:
>>> On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 7:37 PM, David Kowis <dko...@shlrm.org> wrote:
>>>> Unless I misunderstand the problem. In groovy, an ant task would be
>>>> excellent as groovy has Gant http://gant.codehaus.org/ The same ant task
>>>> could be used in zmaven, or in Gradle. I don't know about the other
>>>> languages. Some of the usefulness is dependent upon the project's
>>>> dependency setup, whether they do it manually, or use a tool like ivy,
>>>> or maven, to collect the class path.
>>>>
>>>
>>> How would you run a single feature or scenario using Ant?
>>
>> Ooh, good point. Ant can't do command line parameters like rake can... I
>> hadn't considered that. Maybe ant isn't so useful :( It'd work for
>> running all features, but not making it very easy to run a single scenario.
>>
>> The only way I know of is to do something like this "ant -Dname=val"
>>
>> Example:
>> ant cucumber -Dfeatures=feature1,feature2,feature3
>>
>> Less than optimal.
>
> What would be your dream scenario for installing and running
> cucumber-jvm in a Groovy app without Ant and just a CLI command?
> Asking since I don't know what the Groovy conventions are.
Grails a few times in the past, and currently am using Spock for a java
project, and cucumber for the integration tests.
A good goal might be to integrate with Grails, and go from there,
perhaps? ( http://grails.org/doc/latest/guide/12.%20Plug-ins.html )
It's fairly rails-y at least in spirit, and lacking good feedback,
perhaps it'd be a good place to start.
Maybe there are people on the list that build standalone groovy projects
that are not Grails?
Sorry,
David
aslak hellesoy
an existing one and that messes up archives a bit).
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Cukes" group.
> To post to this group, send email to cu...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> cukes+un...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/cukes?hl=en.
>
Adam Yuret
Adam Yuret
Christian Gleissner
we found it easier to integrate JBehave instead of Cucumber-JVM as
JBehave had some years to mature and is very well documented.
Additionally, the reporting of JBehave is better than Cucumber-JVM. A
major issue we discovered with the current Cucumber-JVM is that it
doesn't support parallel JUnit tests.
Having said that, we still went for Cucumber-JVM as it has a very
flexible regexp-based feature parsing approach, and the migration of
Cucumber features to Cucumber-JVM is very straightforward.
Additionally, you can use the Maven 3 parallel build feature (-Tx) to
get around the lack of parallel JUnit test support. This will spawn
off separate JVMs and it works fine with the current Cucumber-JVM.
I would give both a try and see which one works better for you. It's
very easy to re-use step definitions between the two frameworks, which
are very similar.
Hope this helps
Christian
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed.
If you have received this email in error please notify the sender.
Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the company.
Finally, the recipient should check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses.
The company accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email.
