aries-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Timothy Ward <>
Subject RE: blog and aries trader assembly
Date Wed, 22 Sep 2010 10:31:31 GMT

I really think that we need to run the assemblies as part of our testing every build.

We can use embedded ant to launch the assembly, and to copy the EBA into the load directory,
then to launch some standard JUnits that ping the servlets to see if they're awake. This will
give us a much more reliable mechanism to show that the assemblies work.


> Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2010 10:46:29 +0100
> From:
> To:
> Subject: Re: blog and aries trader assembly
> Hi
> The assembly projects assemble the OSGi platform needed to run samples.
> The only way to be _completely_ certain that the assembly hasn't been
> broken is to is to run the sample. We introduced i-tests for Aries
> Trader and the Blog Sample that mimic the behaviour of the assembly
> projects, and these give a good indication of when an assembly is likely
> to have been broken. So the first rule is that if you have to change a
> sample i-test you almost certainly have to change the assembly project.
> The place where the assembly differs from the i-test is that, to run an
> eba on the platform which has been assembled, you have to copy the eba
> into a load directory. This exact process is not replicated in the
> i-tests so anyone making changes to application, and in particular, the
> code which installs applications really should (currently) manually run
> the blog sample :-)
> I think we might be able to do some more sophisticated testing, but I'm
> not sure how. The other option is for developers to periodically run the
> blog sample. Of course, there are other samples (hello world) which
> don't have i-tests and are probably broken too.
> More generally - there seems to have been some significant re-factoring
> 'Application', thinking ahead to the next release - could someone
> summarise the changes?
> Zoƫ
>> I am just wondering how to remind people (especially new joiners) to
>> maintain the assembly code as the full assembly process is not part of
>> build. Is it too much to make it part of build? Any thoughts?
>> Regards
>> Emily
>> Unless stated otherwise above:
>> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
>> 741598.
>> Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU
View raw message