Who is using the seleniumxml and why?

[Jacopo Cappellato-4]

Good day everyone,

I would love to know from the persons that are using the seleniumxml integration available in framework/testools their opinion about this tools; specifically I am interested to know:

1) how you use it (settings, platform, browser) and if it is functional and useful
2) the advantages you see in using this OFBiz specific integration rather than using the standard Selenium tools
** do you find it easier to setup this component rather than the standard Selenium?
** is it easier to write tests in the custom xml syntax provided by seleniumxml? or do you rather create them (as suggested by the documentation in framework/testools) using one of the standard browser plugins available for Selenium and then convert to xml using the custom script in OFBiz?
3) are you willing to contribute the tests you are using? are they generic enough to be contributed back to the project?

I am asking #1 and #2 because I feel that we could replace all the custom code we have for seleniumxml (and required jar files) with a good document that explains how to setup Selenium (no special integration is actually required for ofbiz) and then, instead of writing/maintaining test scripts in this custom xml formal, we could simply accept and commit standard selenium test scripts (in my opinion users will be facilitated to contribute them without the need to learn a new syntax); we could also provide an ant script to run all of them. In this way we could also use a more recent version of Selenium (web driver).

Thanks for your time,

Jacopo

[Jacques Le Roux]

So nobody is using it?

Jacques

From: "Jacopo Cappellato" <[hidden email]>

> Good day everyone,
>
> I would love to know from the persons that are using the seleniumxml integration available in framework/testools their opinion
> about this tools; specifically I am interested to know:
>
> 1) how you use it (settings, platform, browser) and if it is functional and useful
> 2) the advantages you see in using this OFBiz specific integration rather than using the standard Selenium tools
> ** do you find it easier to setup this component rather than the standard Selenium?
> ** is it easier to write tests in the custom xml syntax provided by seleniumxml? or do you rather create them (as suggested by the
> documentation in framework/testools) using one of the standard browser plugins available for Selenium and then convert to xml
> using the custom script in OFBiz?
> 3) are you willing to contribute the tests you are using? are they generic enough to be contributed back to the project?
>
> I am asking #1 and #2 because I feel that we could replace all the custom code we have for seleniumxml (and required jar files)
> with a good document that explains how to setup Selenium (no special integration is actually required for ofbiz) and then, instead
> of writing/maintaining test scripts in this custom xml formal, we could simply accept and commit standard selenium test scripts
> (in my opinion users will be facilitated to contribute them without the need to learn a new syntax); we could also provide an ant
> script to run all of them. In this way we could also use a more recent version of Selenium (web driver).
>
> Thanks for your time,
>
> Jacopo
>
>
>

[Anne Jessel]

We use Geb (http://www.gebish.org/) and Spock
(http://code.google.com/p/spock/) with Groovy. We find this
combination much easier to use and maintain than using Selenium.

Our tests are for our custom screens, so wouldn't be of any use to the project.

Cheers,
Anne.

On 1 March 2012 08:11, Jacques Le Roux <[hidden email]> wrote:

> So nobody is using it?
>
> Jacques
>
> From: "Jacopo Cappellato" <[hidden email]>
>
>> Good day everyone,
>>
>> I would love to know from the persons that are using the seleniumxml
>> integration available in framework/testools their opinion about this tools;
>> specifically I am interested to know:
>>
>> 1) how you use it (settings, platform, browser) and if it is functional
>> and useful
>> 2) the advantages you see in using this OFBiz specific integration rather
>> than using the standard Selenium tools
>> ** do you find it easier to setup this component rather than the standard
>> Selenium?
>> ** is it easier to write tests in the custom xml syntax provided by
>> seleniumxml? or do you rather create them (as suggested by the documentation
>> in framework/testools) using one of the standard browser plugins available
>> for Selenium and then convert to xml using the custom script in OFBiz?
>> 3) are you willing to contribute the tests you are using? are they generic
>> enough to be contributed back to the project?
>>
>> I am asking #1 and #2 because I feel that we could replace all the custom
>> code we have for seleniumxml (and required jar files) with a good document
>> that explains how to setup Selenium (no special integration is actually
>> required for ofbiz) and then, instead of writing/maintaining test scripts in
>> this custom xml formal, we could simply accept and commit standard selenium
>> test scripts (in my opinion users will be facilitated to contribute them
>> without the need to learn a new syntax); we could also provide an ant script
>> to run all of them. In this way we could also use a more recent version of
>> Selenium (web driver).
>>
>> Thanks for your time,
>>
>> Jacopo
>>
>>
>>
>

--
Coherent Software Australia Pty Ltd
PO Box 2773
Cheltenham Vic 3192
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Web: http://www.cohsoft.com.au/
Email: [hidden email]

Bonsai ERP, the all-inclusive ERP system
http://www.bonsaierp.com.au/

[Brett]

Jacopo,

Your recommendation sounds good.  Selenium has been moving away from their
Selenium RC technology which is the foundation for SeleniumXML.  Instead
they are moving to their new Selenium Web Driver which works a lot like
SeleniumXML.

Unless ofbiz users are actively developing SeleniumXml scripts it may be
easier to deprecate the SeleniumXml code and have users contribute their
native Selenium tests as you describe.

As one of the original creators of the SeleniumXml code, I feel a little
bad that I haven't helped a lot to maintain and improve this framework.
 Unfortunately, my time has been in created AJAX Dojo applications with
ofbiz and Selenium still doesn't have a very good solution for AJAX
applications.

We have been using Dojo's DOH testing framework for our screens as it
allows it to tie into the AJAX features of the screens.

I would be interested in hearing what other developers are using for
functional testing their web applications.



Brett



On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 9:05 AM, Jacopo Cappellato <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> Good day everyone,
>
> I would love to know from the persons that are using the seleniumxml
> integration available in framework/testools their opinion about this tools;
> specifically I am interested to know:
>
> 1) how you use it (settings, platform, browser) and if it is functional
> and useful
> 2) the advantages you see in using this OFBiz specific integration rather
> than using the standard Selenium tools
> ** do you find it easier to setup this component rather than the standard
> Selenium?
> ** is it easier to write tests in the custom xml syntax provided by
> seleniumxml? or do you rather create them (as suggested by the
> documentation in framework/testools) using one of the standard browser
> plugins available for Selenium and then convert to xml using the custom
> script in OFBiz?
> 3) are you willing to contribute the tests you are using? are they generic
> enough to be contributed back to the project?
>
> I am asking #1 and #2 because I feel that we could replace all the custom
> code we have for seleniumxml (and required jar files) with a good document
> that explains how to setup Selenium (no special integration is actually
> required for ofbiz) and then, instead of writing/maintaining test scripts
> in this custom xml formal, we could simply accept and commit standard
> selenium test scripts (in my opinion users will be facilitated to
> contribute them without the need to learn a new syntax); we could also
> provide an ant script to run all of them. In this way we could also use a
> more recent version of Selenium (web driver).
>
> Thanks for your time,
>
> Jacopo
>
>

[hans_bakker]

We are using this and this function should not be deleted quickly....

Regards,
Hans


On 02/23/2012 11:05 PM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:

> Good day everyone,
>
> I would love to know from the persons that are using the seleniumxml integration available in framework/testools their opinion about this tools; specifically I am interested to know:
>
> 1) how you use it (settings, platform, browser) and if it is functional and useful
> 2) the advantages you see in using this OFBiz specific integration rather than using the standard Selenium tools
> ** do you find it easier to setup this component rather than the standard Selenium?
> ** is it easier to write tests in the custom xml syntax provided by seleniumxml? or do you rather create them (as suggested by the documentation in framework/testools) using one of the standard browser plugins available for Selenium and then convert to xml using the custom script in OFBiz?
> 3) are you willing to contribute the tests you are using? are they generic enough to be contributed back to the project?
>
> I am asking #1 and #2 because I feel that we could replace all the custom code we have for seleniumxml (and required jar files) with a good document that explains how to setup Selenium (no special integration is actually required for ofbiz) and then, instead of writing/maintaining test scripts in this custom xml formal, we could simply accept and commit standard selenium test scripts (in my opinion users will be facilitated to contribute them without the need to learn a new syntax); we could also provide an ant script to run all of them. In this way we could also use a more recent version of Selenium (web driver).
>
> Thanks for your time,
>
> Jacopo
>

[Erwan de FERRIERES]

Le 23/02/2012 17:05, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :

> Good day everyone,
>
> I would love to know from the persons that are using the seleniumxml integration available in framework/testools their opinion about this tools; specifically I am interested to know:
>
> 1) how you use it (settings, platform, browser) and if it is functional and useful
> 2) the advantages you see in using this OFBiz specific integration rather than using the standard Selenium tools
> ** do you find it easier to setup this component rather than the standard Selenium?
> ** is it easier to write tests in the custom xml syntax provided by seleniumxml? or do you rather create them (as suggested by the documentation in framework/testools) using one of the standard browser plugins available for Selenium and then convert to xml using the custom script in OFBiz?
> 3) are you willing to contribute the tests you are using? are they generic enough to be contributed back to the project?
>
> I am asking #1 and #2 because I feel that we could replace all the custom code we have for seleniumxml (and required jar files) with a good document that explains how to setup Selenium (no special integration is actually required for ofbiz) and then, instead of writing/maintaining test scripts in this custom xml formal, we could simply accept and commit standard selenium test scripts (in my opinion users will be facilitated to contribute them without the need to learn a new syntax); we could also provide an ant script to run all of them. In this way we could also use a more recent version of Selenium (web driver).
>
> Thanks for your time,
>
> Jacopo
>
>

Hi Jacopo,

while I've been working seleniumXml code, I'm not using it... I find it
too complicated to use: need of changing configuration (https),
transformation from selenese to seleniumxml, etc... I'm in favor of
moving to webdriver, which is a GSoC task I created last year. I hope
that this year one student will step in, and work successfully on it.

Here is the specifications I wrote last year, which still can be improved :
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Pure+webdriver+implementation

Regards,
--
Erwan de FERRIERES
www.nereide.biz

[Jacopo Cappellato-4]

It is interesting, thank you Erwan.
About the integration with OFBiz: apart from the ant task available ootb to run tests what else are you planning to include in OFBiz?
I am asking this because in my opinion the best layout would be the following:
* Selenium is not bundled with OFBiz
* all the generic Selenium tests are bundled in the OFBiz applications
* we include the minimal resources from Selenium in OFBiz (like an ant task or some required jars if really needed)

Development teams that use Selenium usually have their local machines (or some other infrastucture) already setup to run (and create) Selenium tests; in my opinion it is not worth to package and maintain the whole Selenium bundle in OFBiz; if a user is not already setup with Selenium then he/she will not even think about running the tests bundled in OFBiz.

Jacopo


On Mar 1, 2012, at 7:55 AM, Erwan de FERRIERES wrote:

> Le 23/02/2012 17:05, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :
>> Good day everyone,
>>
>> I would love to know from the persons that are using the seleniumxml integration available in framework/testools their opinion about this tools; specifically I am interested to know:
>>
>> 1) how you use it (settings, platform, browser) and if it is functional and useful
>> 2) the advantages you see in using this OFBiz specific integration rather than using the standard Selenium tools
>> ** do you find it easier to setup this component rather than the standard Selenium?
>> ** is it easier to write tests in the custom xml syntax provided by seleniumxml? or do you rather create them (as suggested by the documentation in framework/testools) using one of the standard browser plugins available for Selenium and then convert to xml using the custom script in OFBiz?
>> 3) are you willing to contribute the tests you are using? are they generic enough to be contributed back to the project?
>>
>> I am asking #1 and #2 because I feel that we could replace all the custom code we have for seleniumxml (and required jar files) with a good document that explains how to setup Selenium (no special integration is actually required for ofbiz) and then, instead of writing/maintaining test scripts in this custom xml formal, we could simply accept and commit standard selenium test scripts (in my opinion users will be facilitated to contribute them without the need to learn a new syntax); we could also provide an ant script to run all of them. In this way we could also use a more recent version of Selenium (web driver).
>>
>> Thanks for your time,
>>
>> Jacopo
>>
>>
> Hi Jacopo,
>
> while I've been working seleniumXml code, I'm not using it... I find it too complicated to use: need of changing configuration (https), transformation from selenese to seleniumxml, etc... I'm in favor of moving to webdriver, which is a GSoC task I created last year. I hope that this year one student will step in, and work successfully on it.
>
> Here is the specifications I wrote last year, which still can be improved :
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Pure+webdriver+implementation
>
> Regards,
> --
> Erwan de FERRIERES
> www.nereide.biz

[Anne Jessel]

FWIW Geb is a combination of WebDriver, jQuery and Groovy (Apache
licenced). We're using it with Spock, but it can be used with jUnit
according to the documentation.

Just mentioning it as maybe it would be simpler to use it rather than
copying it by integrating WebDriver and jUnit.

Cheers,
Anne.

On 1 March 2012 17:55, Erwan de FERRIERES <[hidden email]>wrote:

> while I've been working seleniumXml code, I'm not using it... I find it
> too complicated to use: need of changing configuration (https),
> transformation from selenese to seleniumxml, etc... I'm in favor of moving
> to webdriver, which is a GSoC task I created last year. I hope that this
> year one student will step in, and work successfully on it.
>
> Here is the specifications I wrote last year, which still can be improved :
> https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/display/OFBIZ/Pure+**
> webdriver+implementation<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Pure+webdriver+implementation>
>
> Regards,
> --
> Erwan de FERRIERES
> www.nereide.biz
>

--
Coherent Software Australia Pty Ltd
PO Box 2773
Cheltenham Vic 3192
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Web: http://www.cohsoft.com.au/
Email: [hidden email]

Bonsai ERP, the all-inclusive ERP system
http://www.bonsaierp.com.au/

[Jacopo Cappellato-4]

Hi Hans,

interesting; I would love if you could add some details:
* how do you create seleniumxml tests? do you create them manually (editing xml files) or with some other mechanism (Selenium IDE etc...)?
* do you have a big library of test scripts?
* did you try the new version of Selenium?

And last question: when you say "we are using it" what do you mean? You and your development team?

Thanks,

Jacopo

On Mar 1, 2012, at 7:38 AM, Hans Bakker wrote:

> We are using this and this function should not be deleted quickly....
>
> Regards,
> Hans
>
>
> On 02/23/2012 11:05 PM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
>> Good day everyone,
>>
>> I would love to know from the persons that are using the seleniumxml integration available in framework/testools their opinion about this tools; specifically I am interested to know:
>>
>> 1) how you use it (settings, platform, browser) and if it is functional and useful
>> 2) the advantages you see in using this OFBiz specific integration rather than using the standard Selenium tools
>> ** do you find it easier to setup this component rather than the standard Selenium?
>> ** is it easier to write tests in the custom xml syntax provided by seleniumxml? or do you rather create them (as suggested by the documentation in framework/testools) using one of the standard browser plugins available for Selenium and then convert to xml using the custom script in OFBiz?
>> 3) are you willing to contribute the tests you are using? are they generic enough to be contributed back to the project?
>>
>> I am asking #1 and #2 because I feel that we could replace all the custom code we have for seleniumxml (and required jar files) with a good document that explains how to setup Selenium (no special integration is actually required for ofbiz) and then, instead of writing/maintaining test scripts in this custom xml formal, we could simply accept and commit standard selenium test scripts (in my opinion users will be facilitated to contribute them without the need to learn a new syntax); we could also provide an ant script to run all of them. In this way we could also use a more recent version of Selenium (web driver).
>>
>> Thanks for your time,
>>
>> Jacopo
>>
>

[Gil Portenseigne]

Hi Hans,

I agree with jacopo, we used to have a CI using pure selenium with bash
scripts.

 Since we wanted to migrate into jenkins for IC purpose, we are
interested in your habits about using CI within ofbiz.

If we can contribute by giving new tests and using the same system, we
will be glad to do so.

Cheers

Cil

Le jeudi 01 mars 2012 à 08:17 +0100, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :

> Hi Hans,
>
> interesting; I would love if you could add some details:
> * how do you create seleniumxml tests? do you create them manually (editing xml files) or with some other mechanism (Selenium IDE etc...)?
> * do you have a big library of test scripts?
> * did you try the new version of Selenium?
>
> And last question: when you say "we are using it" what do you mean? You and your development team?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jacopo
>
> On Mar 1, 2012, at 7:38 AM, Hans Bakker wrote:
>
> > We are using this and this function should not be deleted quickly....
> >
> > Regards,
> > Hans
> >
> >
> > On 02/23/2012 11:05 PM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
> >> Good day everyone,
> >>
> >> I would love to know from the persons that are using the seleniumxml integration available in framework/testools their opinion about this tools; specifically I am interested to know:
> >>
> >> 1) how you use it (settings, platform, browser) and if it is functional and useful
> >> 2) the advantages you see in using this OFBiz specific integration rather than using the standard Selenium tools
> >> ** do you find it easier to setup this component rather than the standard Selenium?
> >> ** is it easier to write tests in the custom xml syntax provided by seleniumxml? or do you rather create them (as suggested by the documentation in framework/testools) using one of the standard browser plugins available for Selenium and then convert to xml using the custom script in OFBiz?
> >> 3) are you willing to contribute the tests you are using? are they generic enough to be contributed back to the project?
> >>
> >> I am asking #1 and #2 because I feel that we could replace all the custom code we have for seleniumxml (and required jar files) with a good document that explains how to setup Selenium (no special integration is actually required for ofbiz) and then, instead of writing/maintaining test scripts in this custom xml formal, we could simply accept and commit standard selenium test scripts (in my opinion users will be facilitated to contribute them without the need to learn a new syntax); we could also provide an ant script to run all of them. In this way we could also use a more recent version of Selenium (web driver).
> >>
> >> Thanks for your time,
> >>
> >> Jacopo
> >>
> >
>

--
Gil Portenseigne <[hidden email]>

[Erwan de FERRIERES]

Le 01/03/2012 08:10, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :

> It is interesting, thank you Erwan.
> About the integration with OFBiz: apart from the ant task available ootb to run tests what else are you planning to include in OFBiz?
> I am asking this because in my opinion the best layout would be the following:
> * Selenium is not bundled with OFBiz
> * all the generic Selenium tests are bundled in the OFBiz applications
> * we include the minimal resources from Selenium in OFBiz (like an ant task or some required jars if really needed)
>
> Development teams that use Selenium usually have their local machines (or some other infrastucture) already setup to run (and create) Selenium tests; in my opinion it is not worth to package and maintain the whole Selenium bundle in OFBiz; if a user is not already setup with Selenium then he/she will not even think about running the tests bundled in OFBiz.
>
> Jacopo
>
>
> On Mar 1, 2012, at 7:55 AM, Erwan de FERRIERES wrote:
>
>> Le 23/02/2012 17:05, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :
>>> Good day everyone,
>>>
>>> I would love to know from the persons that are using the seleniumxml integration available in framework/testools their opinion about this tools; specifically I am interested to know:
>>>
>>> 1) how you use it (settings, platform, browser) and if it is functional and useful
>>> 2) the advantages you see in using this OFBiz specific integration rather than using the standard Selenium tools
>>> ** do you find it easier to setup this component rather than the standard Selenium?
>>> ** is it easier to write tests in the custom xml syntax provided by seleniumxml? or do you rather create them (as suggested by the documentation in framework/testools) using one of the standard browser plugins available for Selenium and then convert to xml using the custom script in OFBiz?
>>> 3) are you willing to contribute the tests you are using? are they generic enough to be contributed back to the project?
>>>
>>> I am asking #1 and #2 because I feel that we could replace all the custom code we have for seleniumxml (and required jar files) with a good document that explains how to setup Selenium (no special integration is actually required for ofbiz) and then, instead of writing/maintaining test scripts in this custom xml formal, we could simply accept and commit standard selenium test scripts (in my opinion users will be facilitated to contribute them without the need to learn a new syntax); we could also provide an ant script to run all of them. In this way we could also use a more recent version of Selenium (web driver).
>>>
>>> Thanks for your time,
>>>
>>> Jacopo

Hi Jacopo,

what I'm planning to include is just the basics : jars and tasks. Maybe
some tests as an example, like a basic login, and some actions with the
example component.
If there is time remaining, the selenium tests here
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-3511 could be migrated to
webdriver and included too.

Regards,

--
Erwan de FERRIERES
www.nereide.biz