Mailing-List: contact commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" <commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Message-Id: <200205171826.g4HIQPv16420@orion.rgv.hp.com>
From: Ovidiu Predescu <ovidiu@cup.hp.com>
To: "Ivelin Ivanov" <ivelin@apache.org>
Cc: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" <commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Latka & Anteater 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 17 May 2002 13:09:34 CDT."
             <05a601c1fdce$0086a940$12c68842@galina>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 11:26:25 -0700
Sender: ovidiu@orion.rgv.hp.com

This should not be difficult to implement, all the support is already
there: you can simulate sessions by capturing the cookies and passing
them in the subsequent HTTP requests. Session support would be just a
convenience for the developer to not have to do this manually.

The same mechanism could be used to implement "session" support for
Web services, where the session id is encoded as the value of an
element inside the SOAP messages that flow back and forth. It's very
easy to implement this today with Anteater; my colleagues are using
this to test interop with BizTalk, a Microsoft proprietary SOAP-based
protocol.

Regards,
-- 
Ovidiu Predescu <ovidiu@cup.hp.com>

>>> I'm in the job market again, check out my resume and qualifications at:
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Monitor/7464/ (GNU, Emacs, other stuff)

On Fri, 17 May 2002 13:09:34 -0500, "Ivelin Ivanov" <ivelin@apache.org> wrote:

> 
> Session/cookie support is essential indeed.
> I assumed it's supported in Anteater.
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jeff Turner" <jeff@socialchange.net.au>
> To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" <commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
> Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 6:21 PM
> Subject: Re: Latka & Anteater
> 
> 
> > On Thu, May 16, 2002 at 10:41:55AM -0500, Morgan Delagrange wrote:
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Ivelin Ivanov" <ivelin@apache.org>
> > >
> > > > Jeff,
> > > >
> > > > Thank you for the extensive response.
> > > >
> > > > I am having hard time making a choice, but it appears that Anteater
> was
> > > > built from scratch based on your experience with Latka and is
> therefore a
> > > > more viable long term solution.
> >
> > Nono.. Ovidiu Predescu wrote Anteater, in order to automate Cocoon
> > testing (at least partly). Here is his initial post (2001-09-21)
> > outlining the need, and proposed Ant-based solution:
> >
> > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=xml-cocoon-dev&m=100108643304886&w=2
> >
> > I pointed Ovidiu to Latka, saying:
> >
> >   "Note that [Latka] doesn't use Ant. I suspect this is actually a good
> >   thing. Ant 1.x is not flexible enough to be easily repurposed as a
> >   http testing engine"
> >   - http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=xml-cocoon-dev&m=100121712029019&w=2
> >
> > .. and how wrong I was ;P Ovidiu coded up Anteater in a remarkably short
> > period of time, and announced an initial version here:
> >
> > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=xml-cocoon-dev&m=100221277132628&w=2
> >
> > (Full cocoon-dev thread is at
> > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=100108670400002&r=1&w=2)
> >
> > So the point is, Anteater was done in full knowledge of Latka (and
> > Cactus). Ovidiu just wanted to try the Ant approach, and proved rather
> > spectactularly that it's a good one. Anteater is a shining example of
> > successful opportunism, whereas Latka is a shining example of
> > traditional software engineering, crafting a solution to a problem.
> >
> > > I don't know about that...  :)  I think the differences are greater than
> > > they appear; it depends on what your needs are.  I'd try to enumerate
> which
> > > product is better for what, but it's open to interpretation and personal
> > > preference.
> >
> > Objectivism is overrated ;) I'm sure anything you have to say would be
> > useful for people choosing.
> >
> > > > Can latka be used for writing complete test case scenarios: e.g.
> login, go
> > > > through a product purchase, logout?
> > >
> > > I've written tests like that.  You can wrap tests in a "session" tag,
> which
> > > retains cookies and referers between requests.  You can't tell Latka to
> fill
> > > out forms or push buttons, but you can set request parameters and
> request
> > > headers to simulate that kind of user activity.
> >
> > Anteater doesn't have a <session> tag yet (it's in the TODO), so can't
> > do this sort of thing.
> 
> 
> >
> > > > Do you plan to include an option for JUnit reporting in Anteater
> > > > similar to Latka's, so that tests can integrated with all other
> > > > junit tests?
> >
> > Yes that's planned, and there is already a <formatter> element
> > implemented, but I've never seen it working. Ovidiu might know more.
> >
> >
> > --Jeff
> >
> > > At some point, Latka will probably come with an Ant task.
> > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > Ivelin
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> <mailto:commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
> > For additional commands, e-mail:
> <mailto:commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>
> >
> 
> 


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>