Moving to mobile-l
Setting the cookie mf_useformat ensures that the mobile site gets loaded. If tests are run against en.m. etc.. this won't have any effect, but a lot of local instances are setup to run the desktop URL by default. An alternative way of doing this would be to toggle to the mobile site explicitly in the test suite.
e.g. Given /^I am in the mobile view$/ do on(ArticlePage).switch_to_mobile_element.click end
In terms of 2nd question - no I don't think we should abandon trying to test Nearby in the browser, it is one of our most important features and has extremely inadequate test coverage and is one of the things that seems to break the most. Even if the test only works for Firefox, having that test is a good thing.
On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 11:03 AM, Chris McMahon cmcmahon@wikimedia.org wrote:
I should also mention that part of the change is to update the mediawiki-selenium gem to version 2.13. This should make the no_javascript tests pass again (along with some similar tests for ULS).
On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 10:36 AM, Chris McMahon cmcmahon@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi Mobilers,
Ċ½eljko and I have been doing a ton of refactoring, moving shared code out of the repositories and into the mediawiki-selenium gem, and removing cruft along the way.
We've got the code that makes the user agent spoofing into the gem because MobileFrontend and ULS share that code.
We'd like to remove some more code that we believe to be unused, but we need to talk about it here first before that happens. The change is https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/119271/
The first question is: is it necessary to set the cookie "mf_useformat"? We don't see that affecting the outcome of any MF tests. If so, we should make that shared code and not hard-code the name and value of the cookie.
The second question is: should we abandon trying to test Nearby in a browser? Besides the problems of variable geographic data in both the browser and the target wiki, testing Nearby also relies on managing a SQLite file containing a Firefox profile and manipulating the contents of that file. Even if the test worked, it would only ever work for Firefox. It may be better to test that feature below the browser with appropriate mocks and stubs and what have you.