camel-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jean-Baptiste Onofré ...@nanthrax.net>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Mock Objects for Hazelcast Unit Tests...
Date Fri, 04 Oct 2013 13:37:23 GMT
No problem for me, but I would avoid to use both Mockito and Easymock.
Currently, Camel uses Easymock. If you plan to use Mockito, it makes 
sense to update the other tests that use Easymock to use Mockito.

Regards
JB

On 10/04/2013 03:26 PM, James Carman wrote:
> JB,
>
> I have used EasyMock in the past and that's fine if that's what this
> project has standardized upon, but I must suggest we take a look at
> Mockito.  I was recently turned on to Mockito and it really puts the
> "easy" in EasyMock (something they neglected to do I guess :).
>
> James
>
> On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 9:22 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb@nanthrax.net> wrote:
>> Hi James,
>>
>> it sounds good to me. I would advice Easymock.
>>
>> Regards
>> JB
>>
>>
>> On 10/04/2013 03:06 PM, James Carman wrote:
>>>
>>> As opposed to using a real HazelcastInstance, I would like to change
>>> the tests to use mock objects (using Mockito or something).  There is
>>> no real reason to use a live, running Hazelcast instance in a unit
>>> test and it makes the unit tests very slow.  Perhaps having a couple
>>> of tests that test the integration would be fine, but having every
>>> single test running against a real Hazelcast instance is just too time
>>> consuming.  Thoughts?
>>>
>>> James
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>> jbonofre@apache.org
>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>> Talend - http://www.talend.com

-- 
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbonofre@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com

Mime
View raw message