That would be very nice. Maybe bind them to the steps class. I find that we always have a step class per project. So I see no problem as having that as binding point.
Im just interested in getting overhead time down, so we can do more testing :) regards Nino 2010/2/25 Mauro Talevi <[email protected]> > Yes, we could look at new mechanism to map textual scenarios to a runnable > Java method. > > > On 24/02/2010 17:08, Paul Hammant wrote: > > My feeling is that JB 3.x will be able to collect scenarios and run them > without the shim Java classes. > > - Paul > > On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 10:40 AM, Mauro Talevi <[email protected] > > wrote: > >> Currently there is a one-to-one mapping between java and textual >> files. That is a requirement, but you can make the java files all >> extend a base scenario class that centralises the configuration. >> >> How are you running your scenarios? IDE or command-line? >> >> If in IDE, you can defined a JUnit Test Suite to run multiple scenario. >> >> If in command-line, you can run multiple scenarios via filename patterns. >> >> Cheers >> >> On 24/02/2010 09:57, nino martinez wael wrote: >> > Hi >> > >> > Right now we are having one .java for each .scenario . Are it possible >> > to get JBehave to pickup *.scenario and run them somehow (we are using >> > the UnderscoredCamelCaseResolver)? Are there anything I've overlooked? >> > >> > regards Nino >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit: >> >> http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email >> >> >> > >
