[Zope3-dev] RE: [Zope3-checkins] SVN: Zope3/trunk/ Bugfix:

[Roger Ineichen]

Hi Benji

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Benji York [mailto:benji at zope.com] 
> Sent: Saturday, December 03, 2005 4:56 PM
> To: Roger Ineichen
> Cc: zope3-dev at zope.org
> Subject: Re: [Zope3-checkins] SVN: Zope3/trunk/ Bugfix:
> 
> Roger Ineichen wrote:
> > Log message for revision 40515:
> >   Bugfix:
> >   Using getLink('File') will end in a testing failure in 
> our application
> >   because we use a content type '- File' which produce a 
> link called '- File'.
> >   Use the more concrete url attribute instead of the text 
> attribute in 
> >   the getLink method will avoid this. 
> >   
> >   See also collector issue at:
> >   http://www.zope.org/Collectors/Zope3-dev/503 
> 
> > Modified: 
> Zope3/trunk/src/zope/app/apidoc/codemodule/browser/introspector.txt
> > ===================================================================
> > --- 
> Zope3/trunk/src/zope/app/apidoc/codemodule/browser/introspec
> tor.txt	2005-12-03 04:34:49 UTC (rev 40514)
> > +++ 
> Zope3/trunk/src/zope/app/apidoc/codemodule/browser/introspec
> tor.txt	2005-12-03 12:32:48 UTC (rev 40515)
> > @@ -134,7 +134,8 @@
> >  they are provided in a aseparate section. To see anything 
> useful, we have to
> >  add an object to the folder first:
> >  
> > -    >>> browser.getLink('File').click()
> > +    >>> link = 
> 'http://localhost/@@+/action.html?type_name=zope.app.file.File'
> > +    >>> browser.getLink(url=link).click()
> >      >>> import cStringIO
> >      >>> browser.getControl('Data').value = 
> cStringIO.StringIO('content')
> >      >>> browser.getControl(name='add_input_name').value = 
> 'file.txt'
> 
> This isn't really in the "spirit" of testbrowser.  Previously 
> the test 
> would ensure that the desired link appeared on the page, was named 
> correctly (if a bit too generically), and that it went to the 
> appropriate place.  The new version just makes sure the 
> hard-coded URL 
> points to the correct page.

The previous test isn't usefull and raises errors.
It's probably usefull as a human readable documentation.

If I have a link give from a custom content type
called 'My File' and the original link isn't there
because of a missconfguration, the test whould also 
pass. Which I guess ins't the target.

I think we have to find a way where we can ensure that we 
test the correct part and only that part.

Perhaps this is only a usecase if we test generic 
registrablecomponent where will produce links.

Perhaps a method testLink('File') whould be Ok for testing.
But the combination of getLink('File').click() isn't a good idea.
Then this will end in messing up the test if I register a content
type called 'A File' where is rendered before the 'File' link in HTML.

> I prefer some variation on the previous style (with appropriate 
> correction so it isn't so brittle).  

> Comments/ideas?

Not really ;-)

Regards
Roger Ineichen

> -- 
> Benji York
> Senior Software Engineer
> Zope Corporation
>