sven.lauer said

Even though the module is really simple, I agree that there are use cases for it. I wonder though: Why isn't there a failing WebTestCase?

Comments

benoit.bryon’s picture

benoit.bryon commented

I didn't introduced a failing web test case because I couldn't find an usage for it.

The failing unit test case is enough when you want to validate that you can detect errors. As an example, one could use it when configuring a continuous integration server.

The passing web test case is useful when you want to validate that you can execute web tests. As an example one could use it to be sure that there is no error in his installation. The "web test" is useful because Drupal will load more stuff than with "unit test", so there is a meaningful difference.

A failing web test case:

  • could be used to make sure you can detect failing tests? it's a duplicate of the failing unit test case.
  • could be used to make sure you can detect errors related to web tests? PredictableWebTest execution would raise errors in that case.