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

[🚀 Feature]: Better compatibility with Appium #13949

Closed
mykola-mokhnach opened this issue May 16, 2024 · 8 comments
Closed

[🚀 Feature]: Better compatibility with Appium #13949

mykola-mokhnach opened this issue May 16, 2024 · 8 comments

Comments

@mykola-mokhnach
Copy link

Feature and motivation

We would like to improve the compatibility between Appium and Selenium java clients. As the first step it would make sense to avoid using reflection to access various private properties of selenium classes and only rely on public or protected interfaces.

Usage example

Here is the list of changes needed to be done in order to enhance the compatibility:

Increase the scope of private properties of the below classes to 'protected':

RemoteWebDriver -> capabilities

HttpCommandExecutor -> commandCodec

HttpCommandExecutor -> responseCodec

FluentWait -> clock
FluentWait -> timeout
FluentWait -> interval
FluentWait -> sleeper
FluentWait -> ignoredExceptions
FluentWait -> messageSupplier
FluentWait -> input

Make public accessor for the property:

HttpCommandExecutor -> client

DriverService.Builder -> exe

Copy link

@mykola-mokhnach, thank you for creating this issue. We will troubleshoot it as soon as we can.


Info for maintainers

Triage this issue by using labels.

If information is missing, add a helpful comment and then I-issue-template label.

If the issue is a question, add the I-question label.

If the issue is valid but there is no time to troubleshoot it, consider adding the help wanted label.

If the issue requires changes or fixes from an external project (e.g., ChromeDriver, GeckoDriver, MSEdgeDriver, W3C), add the applicable G-* label, and it will provide the correct link and auto-close the issue.

After troubleshooting the issue, please add the R-awaiting answer label.

Thank you!

@iampopovich
Copy link
Contributor

@pujagani @diemol Is it sufficient within the scope of this task to only change access modifiers? For backward compatibility and to maintain the logic in the getter and setter methods for the protected fields of the classes, they need to be left unchanged

@pujagani
Copy link
Contributor

I think so that should suffice.

@Delta456
Copy link
Contributor

Delta456 commented Oct 1, 2024

I think the issue can be closed as the PR which did the changes suggested here is now merged.

@pujagani pujagani closed this as completed Oct 1, 2024
@mykola-mokhnach
Copy link
Author

Thank you @pujagani
Could you please inform us which selenium release includes (or will include) the above changes?

@Delta456
Copy link
Contributor

Delta456 commented Oct 1, 2024

The next monthly release should have the above changes.

@diemol
Copy link
Member

diemol commented Oct 1, 2024

@mykola-mokhnach you can also try out the nightly build https://www.selenium.dev/downloads/#nightly

Copy link

This issue has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity since it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs.

@github-actions github-actions bot locked and limited conversation to collaborators Oct 31, 2024
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants