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

Don't rely on webdriver.promise or webdriver.promise.Scheduler #80

Closed
sjelin opened this issue Jan 19, 2017 · 0 comments · Fixed by #82
Closed

Don't rely on webdriver.promise or webdriver.promise.Scheduler #80

sjelin opened this issue Jan 19, 2017 · 0 comments · Fixed by #82

Comments

@sjelin
Copy link
Contributor

sjelin commented Jan 19, 2017

sjelin added a commit to sjelin/jasminewd that referenced this issue Jan 20, 2017
…ctions

While we support `SELENIUM_PROMISE_MANAGER=0` already, we rely on `SimpleScheduler` and some other
utility functions which will be going away.  This allows jasminewd to work without those utility
functions, and even allows people to pass jasminewd their own custom scheduler implementation.

Closes angular#80
sjelin added a commit to sjelin/jasminewd that referenced this issue Jan 20, 2017
…ctions

While we support `SELENIUM_PROMISE_MANAGER=0` already, we rely on `SimpleScheduler` and some other
utility functions which will be going away.  This allows jasminewd to work without those utility
functions, and even allows people to pass jasminewd their own custom scheduler implementation.

Closes angular#80
sjelin added a commit to sjelin/jasminewd that referenced this issue Jan 20, 2017
…ctions

While we support `SELENIUM_PROMISE_MANAGER=0` already, we rely on `SimpleScheduler` and some other
utility functions which will be going away.  This allows jasminewd to work without those utility
functions, and even allows people to pass jasminewd their own custom scheduler implementation.

This does not fix our tests, which will also break when those utility functions go away.  See
angular#81

Closes angular#80
sjelin added a commit to sjelin/jasminewd that referenced this issue Jan 21, 2017
…ctions

While we support `SELENIUM_PROMISE_MANAGER=0` already, we rely on `SimpleScheduler` and some other
utility functions which will be going away after the control flow has been fully deprecated.  This
commit allows jasminewd to work without those utility functions, and even allows people to pass
jasminewd their own custom scheduler implementation.

This does not fix our tests, which will also break when those utility functions go away.  See
angular#81

Closes angular#80
sjelin added a commit to sjelin/jasminewd that referenced this issue Jan 21, 2017
…ctions

While we support `SELENIUM_PROMISE_MANAGER=0` already, we rely on `SimpleScheduler` and some other
utility functions which will be going away after the control flow has been fully deprecated.  This
commit allows jasminewd to work without those utility functions, and even allows people to pass
jasminewd their own custom scheduler implementation.

This does not fix our tests, which will also break when those utility functions go away.  See
angular#81

Closes angular#80
sjelin added a commit to sjelin/jasminewd that referenced this issue Jan 21, 2017
…ctions

While we support `SELENIUM_PROMISE_MANAGER=0` already, we rely on `SimpleScheduler` and some other
utility functions which will be going away after the control flow has been fully deprecated.  This
commit allows jasminewd to work without those utility functions, and even allows people to pass
jasminewd their own custom scheduler implementation.

This does not fix our tests, which will also break when those utility functions go away.  See
angular#81

Closes angular#80
sjelin added a commit that referenced this issue Jan 21, 2017
…ctions (#82)

While we support `SELENIUM_PROMISE_MANAGER=0` already, we rely on `SimpleScheduler` and some other
utility functions which will be going away after the control flow has been fully deprecated.  This
commit allows jasminewd to work without those utility functions, and even allows people to pass
jasminewd their own custom scheduler implementation.

This does not fix our tests, which will also break when those utility functions go away.  See
#81

Closes #80
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

1 participant