Skip to content
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

NanoHTTPD server + basic espresso call #1

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
May 24, 2017

Conversation

dpgraham
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@dpgraham dpgraham requested review from jlipps and imurchie May 24, 2017 17:43
@@ -0,0 +1,94 @@
package io.appium.espressoserver;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

it might be a good idea to add license header to each .java file

Copy link
Member

@jlipps jlipps left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

maybe we should call this dir espresso-server instead of android-server-app? somehow the latter doesn't seem distinct enough.

also, should we be committing the gradle-wrapper jarfile?

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
/build
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

it might be nice to just have one top-level .gitignore file

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah, we can move it over. This was built by default.

<manifest xmlns:android="https://schemas.android.com/apk/res/android"
package="io.appium.espressoserver">

<application android:allowBackup="true" android:icon="@mipmap/ic_launcher"
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

do we actually have to include icons?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

No I'll get rid of them.

@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
package io.appium.espressoserver;
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

do we need this file? is this in anticipation of writing unit tests?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is generated by default. I think we should leave it there in the event that we want to write unit tests and this is there as a stub.

jcenter()
}
dependencies {
classpath 'com.android.tools.build:gradle:3.0.0-alpha1'
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

should we be using an alpha version of gradle?

@LargeTest
public class ExampleInstrumentedTest {

public class AppiumResponse {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

why are we putting classes in classes?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It's just a PoC for now. I'll be moving everything out afterwards.

* the {@link ActivityTestRule#getActivity()} method.
*/
@Rule
public ActivityTestRule<MainActivity> mActivityRule = new ActivityTestRule<>(
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

this will be deleted and updated with @imurchie's strategy but fine for now

MainActivity.class);

@Test
public void changeText_newActivity() throws InterruptedException, IOException {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

should probably call this something else more descriptive like startEspressoServer

@imurchie
Copy link
Contributor

Or just server, since it is clear this is Espresso, given the driver name.

@jlipps
Copy link
Member

jlipps commented May 24, 2017

Or just server, since it is clear this is Espresso, given the driver name.

Yes this works too. However I wouldn't want people to get confused since there will be two servers in this project: the node+appium proxy server, then the server running in the espresso context. Just server on its own is clear to me, but I'm wondering if it might not be clear initially to others.

@imurchie
Copy link
Contributor

but I'm wondering if it might not be clear initially to others

Reasonable enough. I'm down with espresso-server.

@dpgraham
Copy link
Contributor Author

I'm just assuming we need to commit the gradle-wrapper jar because it was part of the original project and wasn't included in the default .gitignore

Copy link
Member

@jlipps jlipps left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

looks like the old directory still exists in your commit dan

@dpgraham dpgraham force-pushed the dpgraham-appium-espresso-server branch from 534a06f to 5f0a8cf Compare May 24, 2017 19:53
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants