Live data from Hacker News

Prototype: Puppeteer for Firefox

github.com

131–133 of 133 posts

Re: Prototype: Puppeteer for Firefox

#131
post #125
post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Simple, 0 configuration, fast. With a new installation of Selenium I always have to download the Firefox/Chrome drivers, have to setup paths, debug startup erros, plus it crashes pretty often.

No, I meant installing npm

I already had npm installed. And I think npm comes within the Node.js installer.

Re: Prototype: Puppeteer for Firefox

#132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's yet another Chrome only tool.

It works very well for Microsoft Edge too (latest DEV version of it) - https://github.com/GoogleChrome/puppeteer/issues/4185#issuec...

You mean it will work with Microsoft Edge when Microsoft Edge becomes Chrome.

Re: Prototype: Puppeteer for Firefox

#133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>This is one of the biggest weaknesses with Selenium -- it takes a very narrow view of what testing is Selenium/WebDriver isn't a testing tool. It's a a W3C protocol for remote control of web browsers. I think once you get over that misconception, selenium starts to make a lot more sense.

That still doesn't explain to me design decisions like how WebDriver's file upload works. If I'm remote-controlling a browser over a network, wouldn't I occasionally want to send it an arbitrary file upload? Why do I need to separately transfer the file using a different service, and then refer to it with the disk path? The only reason I can think of is, "normal users couldn't do that." But normal users also can't co…

>There's no reason to restrict a control protocol to only things that normal users can do.

The selenium maintainers seem to have a very strong opposite opinion.

Post reply on HN