I agree with you. RoboWeb is not informative enough for CPAN. I chose it for
Sourceforge because it's catchy. :-)
As it stands it is mostly a set of scripts, not modules. That's why I opted for
putting it on Sourceforge rather than on CPAN. Do people here think it worthwile
of being at CPAN under a name of its own?
I would call it
WWW::TestRecorder
WWW::TestSuiteGenerator
or
HTTP::ProxyTestRecorder
Jeremy Howard has suggested WWW:WebMacro (or HTTP::WebMacro) given the
resemblance of recorded sequences to command macros in spreadsheet programs. (He
has also been using the name WWW::Automate for his user agent API).
I've been talking with Jeremy on making RoboWeb output WWW::Automate statements
instead of the raw frozen HTTP::Request objects it currently does. I'm thinking
that it would be best to make RoboWeb accept backend plug-ins so that it can
better adapt to its users preferred client library. Please send any suggestions
or feature requests you have.
Claudio
Gunther Birznieks wrote:
> If you guys end up finally collaborating, one very minor request I would
> have is that it goes into CPAN as something more standard like WWW::
> namespace rather than a marketing name like RoboWeb.
>
> RoboWeb is actually a good product name (and in fact do a search on google
> for other tools with a RoboWeb label attached to them), but it really opens
> up room for misinterpretation in the future. And personally, I think these
> seem like indispensable tools that should be a standard CPAN addition.
> Calling it RoboWeb on CPAN will make it as confusing as figuring out which
> template solution to use -- but I suspect that web testing features can be
> fairly standardized (unlike templates).
>
> At 11:53 AM 7/23/2001 +0400, Ilya Martynov wrote:
>
> > >> We should investigate how these 2 projects can work together when I'm
> > >> done so that RoboWeb 'recorded' sessions can create WWW::Automate methods
> > >> that utilise the structure of the page. The benefits of doing this are:
> > >> 1- Resultant scripts are easier to interpret
> > >> 2- Scripting apps that vary their form field names works.
> >
> >CG> [..skip..]
> >
> >CG> I look forward to seeing WWW::Automate and to working together on this.
> >
> >I've recently become maintainer of another testing module
> >HTTP::WebTest. Stable version (released on CPAN) already has many
> >interesting features (like response time tests, text matching tests,
> >content size checks, support for both remote web server and local test
> >modes). I'm working on its rewrite in modular style where tests
> >modules are pluggable so it will be easily extendable. After finishing
> >with it I thought about writhing proxy that records users actions and
> >produces skeleton of test.
> >
> >Maybe joining our efforts have some sense.
> >
> >--
> > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> >| Ilya Martynov (http://martynov.org/) |
> >| GnuPG 1024D/323BDEE6 D7F7 561E 4C1D 8A15 8E80 E4AE BE1A 53EB 323B DEE6 |
> >| AGAVA Software Company (http://www.agava.com/) |
> > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>
> __________________________________________________
> Gunther Birznieks ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> eXtropia - The Open Web Technology Company
> http://www.eXtropia.com/
