Allow inserting source files in the HEAD / custom context.html
See original GitHub issueBased on #430
Let’s allow custom context.html
and debug.html
.
Add two config options:
- contextFile (default __dirname + ‘…/static/context.html’)
- debugContextFile (default __dirname + ‘…/static/debug.html’)
Issue Analytics
- State:
- Created 10 years ago
- Comments:38 (13 by maintainers)
Top Results From Across the Web
What's in the head? Metadata in HTML - MDN Web Docs
What's in the head? Metadata in HTML · What is the HTML head? · Adding a title · Metadata: the <meta> element ·...
Read more >Include another HTML file in a HTML file - Stack Overflow
In my opinion the best solution uses jQuery: a.html : <html> <head> <script src="jquery.js"></script> <script> $(function(){ ...
Read more >How To Add JavaScript to HTML | DigitalOcean
The <script> tag is pointing to the script.js file in the js/ directory of our web project. Let's consider this line in the...
Read more >How to add a custom right-click menu to a webpage
Welcome to GeeksforGeeks. ... custom context menu here. ... If we right-click on this page, the default menu will pop up. JavaScript code...
Read more >HTML Styles CSS - W3Schools
Internal - by using a <style> element in the <head> section; External - by using a <link> element to link to an external...
Read more >Top Related Medium Post
No results found
Top Related StackOverflow Question
No results found
Troubleshoot Live Code
Lightrun enables developers to add logs, metrics and snapshots to live code - no restarts or redeploys required.
Start FreeTop Related Reddit Thread
No results found
Top Related Hackernoon Post
No results found
Top Related Tweet
No results found
Top Related Dev.to Post
No results found
Top Related Hashnode Post
No results found
Top GitHub Comments
Done in #1825
I believe there are many reasons why allowing custom HTML would be desirable. It gives other projects flexibility to do basically any kind of experimentation with Karma without having to fork the project.
In our specific case, we use oojspec to run unit and integration tests with a single runner. Most integration test runners out there are pretty slow, like Capybara, Selenium or anything using a real browser, headless like phantomjs or not.
OOJSpec doesn’t enforce the way people should write code. If someone wants to be able to register events on DOM selectors which are never unregistered because it’s not needed in the application, they shouldn’t change the way they write their code just to satisfy their test runner limitations. So, one is free to register those events once in a
beforeAll
block and then run a set of tests, which may depend or not on previous tests (they are always run in the specified order by specification) which allows some integration scenarios to be tested more quickly than it would be if the tests had to be written in an independent way and also gives developers more flexibility on how they write code.For this to work, OOJSpec has to run each set of tests, grouped in an specification file, in a separate iframe. OOJSpec currently uses sprockets to create such structure in a similar way adopted by other gems like Konacha and others. It would be awesome to be able to use Karma infra-structure to run a custom HTML runner created to be compatible with Karma API so that it reports the tests run correctly to the client console. It should be doable once we have the ability to specify how the HTML should be written. My plan is to integrate OOJSpec to webpack and test with Karma and stop using sprockets. Another advantage of running the tests in separate iframes is that you are able to test whether all required dependencies were correctly declared since only the dependencies for that test file are loaded in the isolated iframe.