On 3 Dec 2008, at 16:59, Ben M. wrote:
I agree with Ashley. In the past I have done multiple profiles just
as Joseph has suggested. I have then modified my features task to
serially run my different feature sets and profiles. With that you
do have one task you need to run. However, it would still be very
nice if these different profile types, even if not ran as the same
process, could be grouped into a single report and given then
appearance that it was one large process. I understand the problems
and difficulties of doing such a thing, but WDYT? If we think there
is enough value in such an aggregate feature set runner/report and
we can decide on the details then I would be willing to tackle it.
Sounds like there’s two issues here. One is grouping features into
run sets (eg fast-running, slow-running; needs an external service, is
self-contained) the other is running features in a certain mode (eg
against mock-services, against live services; using HTML interface,
using XML interface).
One solution to the first problem could be tagging the features/
Groups: twitter web
Or something. Maybe?
The second problem currently has to be handled as separate Cucumber
rake tasks with different --require options to load different steps.
I don’t have any multi-mode features though, so I haven’t had to worry
about this yet. I suspect the general problem (given all the
potential dimensions you could create) is currently unspecified and
the general solution is quite hard…
I still think having an authoritative ‘rake features’ is essential,