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

[dotnet] Use vendor-specific method names for additional Chromium options. #9906

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Oct 13, 2021

Conversation

bwalderman
Copy link
Contributor

Description

Renames ChromiumOptions.AddAdditionalChromeOption to the more vendor-neutral ChromiumOptions.AddAdditionalChromiumOption. Make this method protected and add vendor-specific versions of this method to the derived classes ChromeOptions and EdgeOptions.

Motivation and Context

This avoids potential confusion with customers using EdgeOptions having to use the Chrome-branded AddAdditionalChromeOption for capabilities that may in fact be Edge-specific (e.g. webview2 or device portal options). The existing AddAdditionalChromeOption is preserved on ChromeOptions to avoid breaking ChromeOptions users that call this method.

Types of changes

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)

Checklist

  • I have read the contributing document.
  • My change requires a change to the documentation.
  • I have updated the documentation accordingly.
  • I have added tests to cover my changes.
  • All new and existing tests passed.

@sonarcloud
Copy link

sonarcloud bot commented Oct 13, 2021

Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!    Quality Gate passed

Bug A 0 Bugs
Vulnerability A 0 Vulnerabilities
Security Hotspot A 0 Security Hotspots
Code Smell A 0 Code Smells

No Coverage information No Coverage information
No Duplication information No Duplication information

@jimevans jimevans merged commit b00c958 into SeleniumHQ:trunk Oct 13, 2021
@jimevans
Copy link
Member

This is a much more elegant API solution. Thank you for the contribution!

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 this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants