What do you think the pros and cons are compared to playwright.dev? The top-level features of recording, replaying, and diff-ing seem very close in my understanding.
One key difference is that with playwright you have to replay against some environment.
Meticulous captures network traffic at record-time and stubs in responses at replay-time, which removes the need for a backend environment to replay against. We also apply a little fuzziness in our replay, like how we pick and choose selectors (e.g. imagine css selectors with hashes in them, the 'same selector' will look very different between two builds).
We have a long way to go in making this robust though.
Is there anything you wish was easier when writing tests with Playwright?
> Meticulous captures network traffic at record-time and stubs in responses at replay-time, which removes the need for a backend environment to replay against.
That's neat.
We've only just started using Playwright, but we're surprised at how easy it is to get going; but we're also all developers. We primarily use it to test large feature flows that are hard to mock in unit tests. For example, one test logs you in, uploads a file, waits for the result, clicks on the download button and makes sure the downloaded file is what we expected. We mainly want to ensure that we don't accidentally delete or hide the login widget or the download button while working on something tangentially related.
In the example outlined above, we don't mind spinning up the backend locally, as this allows the test also to make sure the response is correct.
However, I see how being able to only test front-end code quickly and easily without the need for a backend can be helpful in many applications. Congrats on the launch, and good luck!
