Even the most negative comment can be useful, and so yours is. You made me think that I should be more clear with the goals of my "UI Testing Best Practices" repository. I try to clarify some points:
First of all: is Cypress involved in the "UI Testing Best Practices" project?
No, trust me
Did Cypress push me somewhat to promote their product with my articles and my repository?
Again: no
And so, why you do it?
Because I'm an enthusiast Cypress user, I love UI Testing and when I deepened the topic the first time I realized there are a lot of blog posts and resources but it's not an easy road, that's why I started writing the "UI Testing Best Practices" project
What about the Cypress Ambassador program?
After some talks promoting Cypress they contacted me, the program allows me and other enthusiast developers to be in contact with the Cypress team and offer better support to our own followers
Why you created a "UI Testing Best Practices" repo and you speak only about Cypress?
Because it's the tool that I know better! But my goal is not to limit it to Cypress. Take a look at the draft of the contents to be written (github.com/NoriSte/ui-testing-best...), I have written that experts from other tools are welcomed! I do not know everything about every tool, learning is a goal of my repo, too!
You can take a look at one of the chapters I wrote github.com/NoriSte/ui-testing-best...
and the suggestion I received from a TestCafè user medium.com/@artjomlav/hi-stefano-m...
Cypress is not open source!
Cypress is open source, MIT license, they've created an amazing tool that works perfectly without the Dashboard (I have not used the Dashboard until they allowed me to do so for free)
Cypress is a bad tool!
I do not think so but no problem if I and you think different things. You have highlighted some negative aspects of Cypress (it is not perfect, I know that it has limitations) but you have not listed the pros and you have not listed the Selenium' cons. I think that Cypress makes your testing life easier soon and often. Creating solid tests with Selenium requires to be more experience. When I was testing with Puppeteer, for example, 70%of the best practices I used were to "workaround" the limitation of the tool. Most of them are useless with Cypress. And debugging the front-end app under test is not so easy with Selenium.
BTW: you made me realize that I must clarify and publish the reasons why I started writing the repo, it would be clear for every user. I hope to convince other non-Cypress developers to help me writing the book, instead of making them angry because of my inner positive bias for Cypress.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
Even the most negative comment can be useful, and so yours is. You made me think that I should be more clear with the goals of my "UI Testing Best Practices" repository. I try to clarify some points:
First of all: is Cypress involved in the "UI Testing Best Practices" project?
No, trust me
Did Cypress push me somewhat to promote their product with my articles and my repository?
Again: no
And so, why you do it?
Because I'm an enthusiast Cypress user, I love UI Testing and when I deepened the topic the first time I realized there are a lot of blog posts and resources but it's not an easy road, that's why I started writing the "UI Testing Best Practices" project
What about the Cypress Ambassador program?
After some talks promoting Cypress they contacted me, the program allows me and other enthusiast developers to be in contact with the Cypress team and offer better support to our own followers
Why you created a "UI Testing Best Practices" repo and you speak only about Cypress?
Because it's the tool that I know better! But my goal is not to limit it to Cypress. Take a look at the draft of the contents to be written (github.com/NoriSte/ui-testing-best...), I have written that experts from other tools are welcomed! I do not know everything about every tool, learning is a goal of my repo, too!
You can take a look at one of the chapters I wrote
github.com/NoriSte/ui-testing-best...
and the suggestion I received from a TestCafè user
medium.com/@artjomlav/hi-stefano-m...
Cypress is not open source!
Cypress is open source, MIT license, they've created an amazing tool that works perfectly without the Dashboard (I have not used the Dashboard until they allowed me to do so for free)
Cypress is a bad tool!
I do not think so but no problem if I and you think different things. You have highlighted some negative aspects of Cypress (it is not perfect, I know that it has limitations) but you have not listed the pros and you have not listed the Selenium' cons. I think that Cypress makes your testing life easier soon and often. Creating solid tests with Selenium requires to be more experience. When I was testing with Puppeteer, for example, 70%of the best practices I used were to "workaround" the limitation of the tool. Most of them are useless with Cypress. And debugging the front-end app under test is not so easy with Selenium.
BTW: you made me realize that I must clarify and publish the reasons why I started writing the repo, it would be clear for every user. I hope to convince other non-Cypress developers to help me writing the book, instead of making them angry because of my inner positive bias for Cypress.