Sure, and my issue isn’t that it’s capable of my requirements, but simple to use and meets those requirements. Simplicity is a quality all its own.
JUnit provides sufficient output to meet my requirements, so why overcomplicate it w/ Cucumber? AFAIK, cucumber tests in Java output JUinit as well (at least ours does), so what value exactly is Cucumber providing?
If you don’t want the scenarios that are readable in a business requirement format then it’s not worth the trouble. I haven’t ever seen anyone use it in that way.
Yeah, I don’t get it. The only people looking at the results are devs, so we really don’t need the business requirement text.
I could maybe understand if product owners were creating the requirements in the feature files and devs were implementing them in the code, but that never happens. So the whole cucumber library thing we have going on just feels annoying.
It’s not the only thing we over-engineer. We have dependency injection when we only ever have one dependency (except in tests, in which case we could just use mocking). We take microservices to the extreme (we just broke out a couple hundred lines of code from a few thosand lines of code service). Our test code is unnecessarily reusable (test code is one place where DRY doesn’t really need to apply). And so on. This one in particular is especially annoying because it makes it harder to find the code without providing much benefit.
Our QAs seem to like it, so whatever. I’ll still complain though.
Cucumber can do all of that. Except for failures over time but I’ve never used a framework for that. CI tools typically track that.
Sure, and my issue isn’t that it’s capable of my requirements, but simple to use and meets those requirements. Simplicity is a quality all its own.
JUnit provides sufficient output to meet my requirements, so why overcomplicate it w/ Cucumber? AFAIK, cucumber tests in Java output JUinit as well (at least ours does), so what value exactly is Cucumber providing?
If you don’t want the scenarios that are readable in a business requirement format then it’s not worth the trouble. I haven’t ever seen anyone use it in that way.
Yeah, I don’t get it. The only people looking at the results are devs, so we really don’t need the business requirement text.
I could maybe understand if product owners were creating the requirements in the feature files and devs were implementing them in the code, but that never happens. So the whole cucumber library thing we have going on just feels annoying.
It’s not the only thing we over-engineer. We have dependency injection when we only ever have one dependency (except in tests, in which case we could just use mocking). We take microservices to the extreme (we just broke out a couple hundred lines of code from a few thosand lines of code service). Our test code is unnecessarily reusable (test code is one place where DRY doesn’t really need to apply). And so on. This one in particular is especially annoying because it makes it harder to find the code without providing much benefit.
Our QAs seem to like it, so whatever. I’ll still complain though.