dependsOnMethods not working when dependency is on scenarios with dataProviders

[raviguptasmarsh]

QAF Version

Latest

Steps To Reproduce

1. Create a scenario(ONE) with csv data provider so that its scenario name gets appended with the first column name in the csv data provider.
2. In another scenario(TWO), use this scenario name as a data provider.
3. Run the scenario.

Expected behavior

ONE should run followed by TWO

Actual behavior

No tests run

Is the issue reproducible on runner?

• QAS
• Maven - Yes
• Gradle
• Ant
• Eclipse - Yes

Test case sample

SCENARIO: TWO
META-DATA: {"description":"Test Scenario TWO","groups":["SMOKE"],"dependsOnMethods":["ONE"]}

COMMENT: "THIS IS Scenario <TWO> depends on <ONE>"

END

SCENARIO: ONE
META-DATA: {"description":"Test Scenario ONE","groups":["SMOKE"], "dataFile":"resources/test.csv}

 COMMENT: "THIS IS Scenario <TWO> depends on <ONE>"

END

test.csv
summary,num_of_users
with 1 user,1
with 10 users,10

[raviguptasmarsh]

Other observation:
Also tried
"dependsOnMethods":["ONE - with 1 user","ONE - with 10 users"]
but same result was seen.

[naeem-github]

Hi @raviguptasmarsh For the workaround you can use priority metadata as mentioned in Test case meta-data

[raviguptasmarsh]

Yes, @naeem-github as of now using either "priority" or "dependsOnGroups" as workaround.

[cjayswal]

Related or duplicate to #66

[shivaprasad2634]

This is still not resolved. this is important feature we need. In one of th old post from Amit I found he mentioned
Link : #83
<<<
Depends on method will work only when both methods class instance is same. For BDD/KWD Scenario both Scenario class instance would be different, so it was not working. So now for Scenarios it will check methods class name only.

there are file changes under [src/org/testng/DependencyMap.java]. as part of this change . But now it looks reverted in 3.1.0-RC2

[cjayswal]

Refer #281, With qaf 3.0.0 test dependency with BDD or Feature file is not supported, it will be supported with RuntimeScenarioFactory. You can refer comment on #281 or alternate as suggested in this post.