camel-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christian Schneider <christian.schnei...@sopera.com>
Subject Re: Conceptual 'correctness' of using Camel Unit Tests
Date Thu, 05 May 2011 14:49:32 GMT
Theoretically yes and I know Hadrian was already experimenting with that 
but we are quite conservative with that. You can easily have occasional 
test failures then that take a lot of time to find and fix.

Christian


Am 05.05.2011 15:26, schrieb David Karlsen:
> Can they be run in parallel - or can modules be run in parallel - that could
> speed things up.
>
> 2011/5/5 Christian Schneider<christian.schneider@sopera.com>
>
>> I think it is only named wrong. The camel test support is written to
>> support integration
>> tests not unit tests.
>>
>> I think it is a very good idea to write real unit tests and integration
>> tests. The unit tests are extremly fast and give you a first security. Still
>> the integration tests are very important as many errors can only be spotted
>> this way.
>>
>> I think at the moment camel uses a quite pragmatic test concept. Each
>> component comes with unit tests and integration tests. As long as the tests
>> are fast I think there is no big problem with that.
>>
>> All in all the problem is though that a whole camel build takes aroung 4
>> hours. So we might really be able to do that better. A problem here is
>> though the big number of components we have.
>>
>> Christian
>>
>>
>> Am 05.05.2011 10:56, schrieb Gert Villemos:
>>
>>   Some would argue that a unit test per definition tests the unit completely
>>> standalone. Using JUnit this is easy, especially when combined with
>>> Spring,
>>> i.e. you can isolate your bean and test each method directly.
>>>
>>> The Camel Junit on the other hand test the unit as part of a camle route.
>>> Even if the route is very simple such as
>>>
>>> <route>
>>>    <from uri="direct:in"/>
>>>    <to uri="bean:myBean"/>
>>>    <to uri="mock:out"/>
>>> </route>
>>>
>>> Still, It's testing my bean in a context that is more than just using the
>>> bean methods.
>>>
>>> The Camel in Action book 'only' list on benefit of using Camel Junit
>>> tests,
>>> namely simplification of the unit tests. I would like to hear what the
>>> rest
>>> of you do / think.
>>>
>>> - Do you use only Camel Junit tests using routes?
>>>
>>> - Do  you use 'normal' method oriented JUnit tests for low level tests of
>>> individual methods combined with Camel Unit tests for
>>> 'component/application' level testing?
>>>
>>> - Do you see a conceptual problem in unit testing using Camel JUnit?
>>>
>>> --
>>> View this message in context:
>>> http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/Conceptual-correctness-of-using-Camel-Unit-Tests-tp4372286p4372286.html
>>> Sent from the Camel - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Christian Schneider
>> http://www.liquid-reality.de
>>
>> CXF and Camel Architect
>> SOPERA - The Application Integration Division of Talend
>> http://www.talend.com
>>
>>
>


-- 
Christian Schneider
http://www.liquid-reality.de

CXF and Camel Architect
SOPERA - The Application Integration Division of Talend
http://www.talend.com


Mime
View raw message