Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

[XP] Re: How are you doing 1-week iterations?

Expand Messages
  • Matt
    ... and the ... the ... when ... There is a possibility that the dialogue here isn t conducive to furthering anyones understanding. When the statement Fit is
    Message 1 of 51 , Dec 1, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In extremeprogramming@yahoogroups.com, "Chris Wheeler"
      <christopher.wheeler@...> wrote:
      > On Nov 29, 2007 3:56 PM, Michael Dubakov firefalcon@... wrote:
      > > > > Sorry, but Fit is not an automated test. It is acceptance test
      and the
      > > > > difference is HUGE.
      > > >
      > > > Maybe you mean it's not a unit test? Of course you can and should
      > >
      > >
      > > I mean exactly what I said. FIT is weak test automation tool.
      > >
      > Then, Michael, you are wrong. You seem cemented in your stance, and
      > vigor with which you defend this point makes it no more correct than
      > you first said it.

      There is a possibility that the dialogue here isn't conducive to
      furthering anyones understanding. When the statement "Fit is not an
      automated test" was made, I immediately assumed that the writer didn't
      know *how* to automate Fitnesse tests. We have fully automated
      Fitnesses tests that run as part of our nightly build process via
      CruiseControl so I would have to say that our Fitnesse tests *do* fit
      the mold of "regression" tests as well as "acceptance" tests.

      Forgive the oversimplification for the sake of clarity but regression
      testing is simply testing to make sure that intended functionality
      defined and implemented in the past has not been broken by recent
      modifications. Acceptance testing is making sure that the recently
      written code is "accepted" by the customer as fulfilling their
      requirements. By these two definitions, Fitnesse tests that are run as
      part of a continuous integration process qualify as both.

      That said, Michael is not the only one who is frustrated with the
      limitations of Fitnesse. The adamant stance of its proponents that it
      is the "best thing since sliced bread" can be a little grating on those
      of us who see its flaws. It may be the best thing we have for what it
      does... but that doesn't mean it doesn't leave a lot to be desired.

      That said... it *is* the best thing going that I know of so until I
      find something better... guess I will keep using it!

    • Simon Jones
      ... Reasonably complex in my previous incarnation. One internal product management system and a publicly facing corporate webshop and customer
      Message 51 of 51 , Dec 3, 2007
      • 0 Attachment

        > How complex is your domain? How are you finding, with Selenium
        Reasonably complex in my previous incarnation. One internal product
        management system and a publicly facing corporate webshop and
        customer self-serve.

        > 1) Evolving the tests (or is your ui very stable)?
        Not too bad, but, as the UI changed quite a bit Selenium tests can
        become quite fragile. One of the ways we mitigated this was to use
        another web system (OpenACS) as a test producer. Because its TCL
        based manipulating text and creating dynamic pages is easy, so often
        Selenium tests became TCL web pages designed to dynamically generate
        the required selenium based on querying the application.

        > 2) Speed of running (and the impact on feedback time)?
        Can be slow yes.. Using firefox and a few tweaks helped though.

        > 3) Their value in thinking about the domain?
        This is where I think selenium wins and also where its useful when
        the UI is actually very important.

        Selenium is technical enough that you can do quite powerful things
        with it. Its simple enough that any tester can pick it up quite
        easily and its /visible/ enough that the customer can /see/ what the
        test is doing.

        Although Selenese tests can become quite time consuming to manage, in
        our case it was worth it becuase such importance was placed on the
        behaviour and appearance of the website under test. Things like
        whether certain text appeared, certain HTMl directives were in the
        page, certain flows behaved as expected were all quite high priority
        for our customer.

        But, from a personal POV I would highly recommend OpenACS as a pretty
        neat 'testing platform'. The TCL driven architecture (and AOLServer)
        were pretty much ahead of their time a few years ago, but they still
        perform quite well and most importantly its easy to build web stuff
        quickly... TCL always was a pretty good language for test
        development, even before agile.
        > Cheers, Rick
        > Michael Dubakov wrote:
        > >
        > >
        > > ...
        > >
        > > But we do write regression tests to make sure that all working as
        > > expected. And regression tests on Selenium are MUCH easier to
        > > and support.
        > >
        > > Michael Dubakov
        > > http://www.targetprocess.com <http://www.targetprocess.com>
        > >
        > >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.