Documenting code, one commit at a time.
Testing is the backbone of stable software, but browser automation often feels like gardening: you spend half your time weeding out flaky tests to keep the path clear. In the ejar-demo_selenium project, we recently revisited our automated test suite to ensure that our browser interactions remain reliable and robust.
Automated tests using Selenium often fail
Automating web interactions can feel like a daunting task, but it is a critical skill for ensuring application stability. Whether you are validating a simple login flow or complex dynamic content, Selenium provides the programmatic control needed to simulate real user behavior across different browser environments.
At its core, browser
Automation is only as good as the reliability of its test suite. Even a small misconfiguration can lead to "flaky" tests that erode confidence in your CI/CD pipeline. This is a look at recent maintenance work on the exercise-demo_selenium project to stabilize our automated browser interactions.
When writing Selenium tests in Python, it is common to rely on
When working on automated testing projects like IvanaaCastillo/ejercicio-demo_selenium, configuration files are the foundation of your build process. A small typo in a dependency manifest can lead to frustrating "package not found" errors that halt CI/CD pipelines.
Maintaining a clean environment starts with correctly naming
Updating a README is often treated as an afterthought—a quick task performed between major feature branches. However, when working on my personal project, IvanaaCastillo, I realized that my project documentation was becoming just as cluttered as the legacy code I was trying to avoid. A README isn't just a file; it is the front door to your work.
I sat down to evaluate the state of