-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 14
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Rule proposal: no-browser, to complement no-browser-driver #97
Comments
@dietergeerts thanks for the idea! I am leaning towards having
Please let me know if this makes sense. Thanks again. |
Yes, sounds a good choice. Do I give it a try? |
@dietergeerts yes, please. Let me know if you have any questions or need help. |
Ok, I'll give it a shot. It will be a bit more work, as I first have to check which functions are being wrapped by the |
I observed something different while testing the non-angular application. The experiment that I did on my sample framework is as below
Now to test any non-angular application I would either add browser.waitForAngularEnabled(false) in onPrepeare function or just use browser.driver.get() |
@Prabhs2 , that's exactly what this linting rule will be for. The wrapper functions of |
While searching for reasons to use the one or the other, I found this: angular/protractor#634. I can conclude from there that depending on the used libraries in your webapp, the one is better than the other to use. Therefore, I think that OR we need a rule to complement the already existing
no-browser-driver
, OR we need a more general rule that is configurable to have either the one or the other as preferred.I'm not creating a PR yet, as I first want to know what is preferred to do: adding a new rule, or make the current rule configurable (though naming wise it will be a little bit off then).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: