How to run jbehave scenario with multiple browers in parrell? I am passing browser name as run time parameter from bamboo and adding it to SauceWebDriverProvider in my code. I want to execute this scenario with multiple browsers parrell in sauce. Please help me in finding solution.Thanks
I have a scenario like this:
Scenario: +Login: User Logs into myapplication
Given I log into myappliation with and valid password
Then ensure that user is able to login myapplication
Examples:
|username|password|
|lee|password|
Related
I have keycloak on docker (v20.0.2) and as you know some versions change some or good part of the UI, so is hard to follow tutorials around the web...
I am trying to follow this particular tuto
https://developers.redhat.com/blog/2020/11/24/authentication-and-authorization-using-the-keycloak-rest-api#keycloak_sso_demo
that seems the more updated. My keycloak is actually behind traeffic and thomseddon/traeffic-fordward-auth with a docker-compose file (but the connection through traeffic is good and I have acces to admin UI)
So on step 10 of the tutorial things change for me, I have to look for that particular view inside:
Click on lateral menu Client Scope
Click on button Create client scope
Give a name to the scope, and click on Tab Mapper
All mappers are predefined... so there is no "New mapper" don't understand this bit
then just follow the tuto
With that series of steps I get an error when retriving the token...
https://keycloak:8443/realms/education/protocol/openid-connect/token
enter image description here
(this are fake local data from the realm I created for testing)
that responds with a or something similar I have also tried to change the grant_type to password, and the same happens can not query the token....
{
"error": "invalid_client",
"error_description": "Invalid client or Invalid client credentials"
}
But if I do not link a user with an scope/role as in the tuto suggest then I get the token, but of course I want to use the role or scope to limit who can see which endpoint and who can not
Any step that I'm missing from this update, do you have the same error?
Thank you in advance
I have tried to run it with different combinations of options to see if there is a toggle that actually allows me to fetch the token
Also with different types of grant_type
I will build an API in Python (I don't know Java and prefer Json instead of XML) that connect to this keycloak to allow users or not based on their scope/role/permission or something
I need to be able to block user so if user Student try to access an url from another Student he get blocked that url. So is based on the role or scope or I don't know which is prefered or easer to accomplish, the mission is to block users or not based on a factor that could be used for this in keycloak.
Trying to retrofit an old webforms application.
Got my configuration working so that it's prompting for login and successfully redirecting back to the application. The folks that manage the IP can see the response is generated.
However in the callback to my application the User is null. I'm told if it's configured correctly it should be populated.
We have a custom IHttpModule and that is where I can see getting hit with the call to /Saml2/Acs with the User not populated. I think this may be expected as the handler for that is supposed to populate the User, I think? However the following call (the returnUrl configured in sustainsys.Saml2) still has no User and I don't see any sort of error or anything.
Anyone with experience have an idea how to debug this?
The call to /Saml2/Acs should be taken care of by the Sustainsys.Saml2.HttpModule. It will process the response and then call the SessionAuthenticationModule to set a cookie that preservers the User across calls.
To get some more information about what's happening in the library, you can assign an implementation of ILoggerAdapter to Sustainsys.Saml2.Configuration.Options.FromConfiguration.SPOPtions.Logger to get some logging output from the library.
My issue turned out to be that I had another authentication module loaded before SessionAuthenticationModule and Saml2AuthenticationModule in the web config.
The comment in the example was
Add these modules below any existing. The SessionAuthenticatioModule
must be loaded before the Saml2AuthenticationModule
However in my case with I had another authentication module involved that needed to go last.
I'm trying to generate documents using conga composer 8 from apex code but its failing with error Failed to run the post-merge process. I have looked into url and its same as the one I used initially in another salesforce org. I couldn't find any help online or on conga-composer form.
Here is my conga endpoint URL:
https://composer.congamerge.com/Composer8/Index.Html? sessionId=00D41000000dorw!ARQAQKbinH5TXMR_70s3XCShQh5GuSVdrFcq0Fg9OidZLo9MLxzWSby8QY1B4xM8e72DPawVziclnXBjTzpG41RiCAPKQqOt
&serverUrl=https://na35.salesforce.com/services/Soap/u/29.0/00D41000000dorwEAA
&id=a1J410000012BwS
&TemplateId=a0C41000000kg5GEAQ
&APIMODE=13
&ESAgreementName=Contract+for+Test
&queryid=a0441000001PwI7AAK,a0441000001PwICAA0
&ESSignatureType=2
&ESSignatureOrder=2
&ESVisible=1
&ESCustomField=cldocgen__App__c
&ESCustomFieldValue=a1J410000012BwSEAU
&ESRecipient1=00541000000Ke9pAAC
&ESRecipient2=003410000078zVbAAI
&ESRecipient3=003410000078zVhAAI, Method=GET]
Any insight what might be causing this issue.
I had the same problem and was able to solve it using permissions. In this case make sure the user id whose sessionID is passing to Conga has the correct CRUD access to the primary object in your conga call (id=a1J410000012BwS). My guess is that this is something to do with Conga not being able to write the attachment back to salesforce.
Apart from what Greg has mentioned, there are 2 more observations for this error:
Under Email Administration -> Deliverability -> Access to Send Email (All Email Services) should be set to All email.
In case you are using the EmailTemplateId parameter then the classic email template must be available for use.
Also mostly this error is also because of some discrepancy in the URL.
I am looking to introduce Facebook login/sign up tests into a Webdriver suite for a C# application.
Facebook Developers has an article on manual verification, but does not seem to reference any procedure for automating these tests. I could simply write the steps indicated but I would like to avoid running scripts on the Facebook UI, especially when it involves creating test users.
Looking through a few previous answers, it appears that Facebook had an automation solution a few years ago, but I can no longer find any reference to it anywhere.
Has anyone had any experience automating Facebook Connect login or sign up? Any tips or strategies you can share would be greatly appreciated.
The first thing you probably want to do is create test users.
The Facebook API lets you do this easily;
https://developers.facebook.com/docs/graph-api/reference/v2.0/app/accounts/test-users
This will give you a login url which should result in automatic login and as result drop a cookie which should help you avoid manual login within your application.
The api also allows you to create relationships and publish events
You can connect to Facebook by logging in automatically using Selenium, I wrote it in Java.
It roughly looks like this:
void login()
{
if(isElementFound(EMAIL_FIELD))
driver.findElement(EMAIL_FIELD).sendKeys(username);
if(isElementFound(PWD_FIELD))
driver.findElement(PWD_FIELD).sendKeys(password);
if(isElementFound(LOGIN_BUTTON))
driver.findElement(LOGIN_BUTTON).click();
if(waitForElement(MENU, 30))
System.out.println("login Successful");
else
System.out.println("login un-successful");
}
#Test
public void facebookLogin() throws Exception {
WebDriver driver = getDriver();
driver.get("http://www.facebook.com");
WebElement email = driver.findElement(By.name("email"));
email.clear();
email.sendKeys("myuser");
WebElement password = driver.findElement(By.name("pass"));
password.clear();
password.sendKeys("mypass");
WebElement loginbutton = driver.findElement(By.id("loginbutton"));
loginbutton.click();
System.out.println("done!");
}
When I needed to do this, the option of creating test users was not sufficient - they were too short lived and we needed time to populate them with a particular set of attributes.
We ended up setting up servers that mocked the parts of the Facebook APIs that were exercised in our tests. We then redirected the test environment to resolve the facebook domain names to our those servers. It was not easy, but this approach had several advantages
We could populate the users as we pleased without worrying about them disappearing
We could have as many as we wanted
We could control the performance of the FB APIs - and capture metrics on that performance during the test. If something was slow, we could be sure it wasn't a FB hiccup. If we wanted to test what happened to the target app if FB got slow, we could do that, too.
After having gotten more comfortable in Behaviour-Driven Developement using SpecFlow, I was wondering about having multiple scenarios for the same feature as follows:
Register.feature
Feature: Register a new user
In order to use the system,
one must register with the system
so that one gets authorized and may login
Scenario: Register a new user using valid credentials
Given I am on the registration page
When I have entered my desired username "UserName" and password "password"
And I have confirmed my password "password"
And I click the register button
Then I shall get confirmation that I am now a registered user
Beside the fact that my scenario might have gotten a bit too fat, one must also manage to validate other scenarios within the registration process such as:
Input user name is too short
Input password is too short
Input password doesn't contain numbers
Input password doesn't match the confirm password
Just to name a few. I have read about tags using SpecFlow Feature File so that I could perhaps do as follows:
#shorterPasswordProvided
Scenario: Register a user using a password that is too short
Given I am on the registration page
When I have entered my desired user name
And I have provided a password that is too short "allo"
And I click the Register button
Then I shall get an error message which mentions about the password minimum length
#noCredentialsAtAll
Scenario: Register a user using no credentials at all
Given I am on the registration page
When I click on the Register button with no credentials entered
Then I shall get an error message that says I have to fill all required fields in
Then, using the [BeforeScenario("myTag")] should do the trick.
The hooks allows for the execution of a subset of the tests to be executed following certain rules. So, a When method could then be executed with a predefined context, that is, the hook for which it was meant to be executed, and that is mentioned through the BeforeScenario or the like attribute.
Have I understood correctly, or am I in fog here?
Am I pushing too far?
Am I missing something?
Are all the "too short password", "no credentials provided" considered different usage scenarios, or are they something else which could only fit somewhere else in the code, like the unit tests themselves?
I mean, all those scenarios belongs to the Register feature, and as such, they shall be defined in the same Register.feature SpecFlow Feature File, right?
Ok, you have a couple of questions, so I'll work through them:
Then, using the [BeforeScenario("myTag")] should do the trick.
The BeforeScenario hook attribute is used to run some code before the scenario executes. It's often used to set-up the environment for the scenario (e.g. populate the test database with pertinent data); if used for this purpose, then the use of AfterScenario can also be used to clean-up the result of BeforeScenario.
The hooks allows for the execution of a subset of the tests to be
executed following certain rules. So, a When method could then be
executed with a predefined context
If I understand you correctly, you want to be able to use a tag to control when a step within the scenario can be run/not-run. This is not possible with SpecFlow's hook attributes; there is a BeforeStep hook but this only enables you to execute code before the step is run, it doesn't allow the step to be ignored.
Are all the "too short password", "no credentials provided" considered
different usage scenarios, or are they something else which could only
fit somewhere else in the code, like the unit tests themselves?
In your example, yes these are different scenarios for your "Register a new user" feature. If you are taking a strict BDD approach to your development, then with your "outside-in inside-out" development approach you will also implement unit tests (by falling back to TDD as part of the BDD process) which will also cover the "too short password" and "no credentials provided" validation.
As for your scenario:
When I have entered my desired username "UserName" and password "password"
Instead of using this, use:
When I enter my username "UserName"
And I enter my password "password"
By doing this you will be able to re-use "When I enter my password" in "Register a user using a password that is too short". This leads me onto:
And I have provided a password that is too short "allo"
There is no need to have a separate step which states the password is too short. Just re-use:
When I enter my password "allo"
For the same reason, don't use:
When I click on the Register button with no credentials entered
just reuse:
When I click on the Register button