feat(base-driver): Remove deprecated routes #21134
Conversation
| GET: {command: 'getSession', deprecated: true}, | ||
| // Even though this command is not present in the official W3C protocol | ||
| // we find it useful and keep it for good in Appium | ||
| GET: {command: 'getSession'}, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Isn't this replaced by GET /session/:sessionId/appium/capabilities?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
there are too many things, especially in tests, depending on this endpoint
perhaps it would be a good idea to do something about it in the other PR
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Alright, if we want to handle it in a separate PR, that sounds reasonable.
| @@ -123,9 +123,9 @@ describe('AppiumDriver', function () { | |||
| mockFakeDriver | |||
| .expects('createSession') | |||
| .once() | |||
| .withExactArgs(undefined, null, W3C_CAPS, []) | |||
| .withExactArgs(W3C_CAPS, W3C_CAPS, W3C_CAPS, []) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do we want to keep the same argument count? If we're making a breaking change, might as well remove the now-duplicate arguments.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this is something I don't really want to break as it would require to update all drivers.
Historically we were sending w3c caps as the third argument, where the first and the second were reserved for jwp caps.
I've updated the logic so now w3c caps are passed to all three, which still makes it backward compatible with other createSession signatures as we pick these arguments in priority: 3 ?? 2 ?? 1
Would you still prefer to rather break the stuff?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We would have to update all drivers regardless, due to the minimum Node version bump. But I'm fine if we decide to keep this for now, and change it in the next major release.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yeah I think we should probably make this breaking change for v3. It's been super annoying and we're already making breaking changes so...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't mind. It should be done in a separate PR though, this one is already quite large
No description provided.