I am running Fitnesse on several dispathers and then copy Fitnesse history and logs from all dispatchers to a separate machine. Some other project members need access to test results on this machine but I don't want them to be able to click Test or Suite there. Is it somehow possible to disable Test and Suite buttons?
I would be glad for any options: either somehow configure it in Fitnesse, or get a patched fitnesse.jar, or any other options.
On the main Fitnesse site (http://fitnesse.org/StayInformed), there is the following note: "Note, the Test and Suite buttons on this site have been disabled because search engines tend to invoke them and put my server under stress. This site is actually created with FitNesse.". So I need something like that, if possible.
Is it possible? Not sure I can find a corresponding place in source code to patch and re-build it. My hope is whether someone already did it or find it easy to help. I raised an issue in GitHub where Fitnesse source code is located but I didn't get any feedback yet.
Thank you!
It is indeed possible, that is indeed what is done for fitnesse.org.
I'm not 100% sure how its done but I suspect it is done by disabling 'responders', see http://fitnesse.org/FitNesse.UserGuide.AdministeringFitNesse.ConfigurationFile.
In that page a description is given to disable creating new pages:
Responders=addChild:fitnesse.responders.DisabledResponder,new:org.fitnesse.responders.DisabledResponder
You can probably also use this to disable SuiteResponder and TestResponder, by using:
Responders=suite:fitnesse.responders.DisabledResponder,test:org.fitnesse.responders.DisabledResponder
The full list of responders is in fitnesse.responders.ResponderFactory
On a side note: why do need a full FitNesse installation to show test results? I recommend you look into generating tests results in html format, and just publish that html somewhere. I usually use the jUnit runner to run the tests on a build server (it also creates html output) and then publish the html files generated as build artefact which people can open/view.
Sample, from FitNesse project, generating html in build/fitnesse-results:
import org.junit.runner.RunWith;
#RunWith(FitNesseRunner.class)
#FitNesseRunner.Suite("FitNesse.SuiteAcceptanceTests.SuiteSlimTests.TestScriptTable")
#FitNesseRunner.FitnesseDir(".")
#FitNesseRunner.OutputDir("./build/fitnesse-results")
public class FitNesseRunnerTest {
}
Related
AEM 5.6.1
I am trying to run some server side testing using the sling testing tools. I have deployed the junit.core bundle and I can navigate to the JUnitServlet at /system/sling/junit/
When I hit this url there are tests visible from multiple bundles, I don't want to run the adobe ones but I can't figure out how to filter package names past the period using the url.
e.g
Available tests:
com.adobe.stuff
com.my.stuff
I tried:
/system/sling/junit/com/ <--works but isn't detailed enough
/system/sling/junit/com.my <-- breaks unsurprisingly
/system/sling/junit/com%2Emy <-- also breaks with 501
Is there an expected way of doing this? I couldn't find any documentation about this and the javadoc didn't really help either.
/system/sling/junit/com.my.html should work - you are right that the /system/sling/junit servlet should make this more explicit. There are examples of running such tests from proxy JUnit tests in the Sling codebase, see SlingServerSideTest for example.
I'm trying to use DRT for running acceptance tests.
Because it's an acceptance test I need to change the location to open the page under test. But of course, after I've done it my test script is gone.
I tried to use iFrames as a workaround, but Dart doesn't provide any means of getting the content of an iFrame. Which means that it's possible to load the page under test into an iframe, but it's impossible to get its html.
I've checked all the DRT tests in the Dart repo:
http://code.google.com/p/dart/source/browse/#svn%2Fbranches%2Fbleeding_edge%2Fdart%2Ftests%2Fhtml
but it seems that none of them changes the location.
Is it possible to use DRT for running acceptance tests? Is there a workaround I didn't think of?
We haven't come up with a good trick (redirection or iframes) to load the app as it is written and runs the test code on top of it. Instead, you could copy the entrypoint of an app and include the test code there, then run the modified app directly in DRT.
Here is an example from the web-ui codebase of a test that does this. This test runs the TodoMVC app and interacts with it:
https://github.com/dart-lang/web-ui/blob/master/test/data/input/todomvc_listorder_test.html
All we did is copy the original app's html, add the 'testing.js' script tag, and replace the dart script tag with the test code. It might be possible to create a script that automates what we do manually today, but we haven't done that.
I have a test in fitnesse which used to work, but when I got into work today the test did not start at all. As soon as I press test I get the "0 errors 0 warrings..." text on the top of the test. Looking in the source control software, I can not find any changes to the test, or to anything related to it. I have noticed that the runner process does not start when I run the test. Other tests seem to work fine, and I can copy the tables from the test which is not working into an other test and everything is fine. Any ideas on what could be wrong?
My standard answer in this situation is, "have you checked your classpath?"
I say this, as typically when this sort of thing happens, it is that the !path doesn't point to the stuff you need, whether it be FitNesse.jar or your own custom code.
Also, do you get an output page where you can check the classpath? i doubt it, but that can help diagnose classpath issues.
My idea is that it's much easier to edit related code when it sits in single "work" file. E.g. in Rails application when you implementing some functionality you may edit 1 function per file in the following files: integration test, controller test, controller, model, controller helper. So if it would be possible to 1) mark this code fragments 2) automatically collect them in "work" file 3) edit them togather 4) the tool synchronizes (puts back) the changes; it could simplify development process in many cases. Especially if you need to go through many tweek-and-try iterations.
Vim works fine for this. Install the Rails.vim(1) plugin and with the command :AV you can open a vertical split with the accompanied tests/specs, or :RV to open related files like migrations and views (depending on whether you're viewing model or controller). When you're workspace becomes to cluttered, use :only to go back to one file. Splits are the best way to manage multiple related files IMHO. You can even open the same file twice to see two parts of the same file. It's not exactly the same as you are describing, but it comes close.
1: http://rails.vim.tpope.net/
Just open up Vim and open some windows. What's the problem?
I want to insert some script into every page, which have some functions that will be called by the modified HTML of that page, using a Firefox extension. I am able to insert the JavaScript into the head of the HTML, and also modify the page, but the java script functions are not called by the onmouseover event.
Does someone has any pointer on how to do that, using java script in local extension or as a online resource.
No GreaseMonkey, I need to do it with my plugin and not ask user to install greasemonkey, my plugin and the scripts.
Greasemonkey does this. It's excellent!
Make a Greasemonkey script. See Userscripts.org for lots of example ones to work off.
Why not use Greasemonkey? It allows you to execute javascript on any page on Firefox, and if executing the code you enter isn't good enough you could dynamically add links to the head, too.
you can modify the DOM using Firebug. I am not sure if you can load files locally.. sounds malicious. Also, you can just run arbitrary javascript commands in the Firebug console (a la python/ruby console)
There are some Greasemonkey-to-extension "compilers" (or extension-wrappers) out there:
Arantius's GM compiler
Gina Trapani's multiple-GM-script compiler
I've used the first one with extensive internal tweaking over time. However, I don't believe the compiler is actively maintained (default max-version is only 3.0), so may not be up-to-date with the latest GreaseMonkey, or FireFox.
I think Gina Trapani's is more designed for multiple scripts targetting the same domain, but I haven't used it.
Neither of these is a "GreaseMonkey solution" per se, as the end-user never has to install GreaseMonkey. They get a real-live FireFox extension. The core is very similar to GM, but you can change or add as much as you like.