You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I wanted to start a discussion around the idea of abstracting web driver implementations into "adapters" which have a specified interface.
A little background: We have scripts already written utilizing selenium-webdriver however we do not currently have the ability to run against a grid of browsers. We examined the source code of this library and loved the implementation. The only issue is that it is dependnent on utilizing wd rather than selenium-webdriver.
By agreeing on a common interface, the webdriver implementations could be abstracted and specified as a configuration option. The library would default to using wd.
At a high level if you are ok with this approach, I can dive deeper and propose what the interface will look like. Upon approval of the interface, I will make the necessary code changes and submit a PR.
If you are not longer maintaining this library, or have little interest in the proposed changes, we will move ahead by forking and simply swapping wd out.
Thanks!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I am hugely in favor of this approach. It had been discussed in the past but was considered too difficult to pursue - but if you're willing to do it, go for it, I'd happily bring it to master.
I wanted to start a discussion around the idea of abstracting web driver implementations into "adapters" which have a specified interface.
A little background: We have scripts already written utilizing
selenium-webdriver
however we do not currently have the ability to run against a grid of browsers. We examined the source code of this library and loved the implementation. The only issue is that it is dependnent on utilizingwd
rather thanselenium-webdriver
.By agreeing on a common interface, the webdriver implementations could be abstracted and specified as a configuration option. The library would default to using
wd
.At a high level if you are ok with this approach, I can dive deeper and propose what the interface will look like. Upon approval of the interface, I will make the necessary code changes and submit a PR.
If you are not longer maintaining this library, or have little interest in the proposed changes, we will move ahead by forking and simply swapping wd out.
Thanks!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: