how to copy mozilla geckodriver for selenium

#HOW TO COPY MOZILLA GECKODRIVER FOR SELENIUM HOW TO#

Just for simplicity, isn't it possible to do something simple on HTTP with Server-Sent Events endpoints, without adding the complexity of a BiDi protocol on WebSocket. with the help of a proxy, but that would mean a lot of effort for unknown gain).

Javascript errors which lead to graphical/interaction glitches but don't affect any of the tested functionality, or missing resources…, and yes I know that former I could catch using pixel testing and latter by looking at traffic e.g. (And maybe even Safari if you want an extra I understand the reasoning, and yet 'perfect is the enemy of good'… From a perspective of a testing engineer writing automated tests for large-scale web projects is simply better in Chrome because thanks to this feature I can catch potential problems which show up in the error console but not in the tests (e.g. I have no idea whether the same is possible with Mozilla's equivalent for Firefox, I would also be interested to know so Firefox will be less of a second-grade browser in our CI setup.īTW, I personally would always test in both browsers. Clients like Selenium for Python then allow you to execute these commands right away. I know that it is possible in Chrome through CDP (Chrome Devtools Protocol), a more powerful but also more low-level protocol for programmable interaction with Chrom(e|ium).

#HOW TO COPY MOZILLA GECKODRIVER FOR SELENIUM HOW TO#

An obvious publish-subscribe candidate would be logging.Īt the moment I see little hope for geckodriver implementing the Selenium logging API if (a) it is not part of the WebDriver standard, and (b) a log service on top of CDP exists and there is interest in the WG for an upgrade mechanism to I am sorry don't know how to do it in Firefox, I just outlined how it might be theoretically possible. Since this issue was filed there has been some interest amongst vendors to allow CDP as an upgrade mechanism in WebDriver, so a large part of the discussion in Lyon centred around what a bidirectional asynchronous protocol might enable in terms of features. This runs the risk of missing out on log entries (because of the ring buffer) and is generally speaking a feature not suited to a blocking pull-push transport mechanism such as HTTP/1.1. The fear the WG has is that the logging API as implemented in Chrome is limited by the pull-push model restriction of HTTP: it builds up a log cache in a ring buffer internally, and then returns the cache when requested to by the client.

In fear of derailing this discussion, the WebDriver WG did talk about logging at the previous F2F in Lyon.

How to copy mozilla geckodriver for selenium