db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rick Hillegas <Richard.Hille...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: [jira] Commented: (DERBY-516) Need to incorporate client backward/forward compatibility testing into testing procedures.
Date Thu, 27 Oct 2005 14:15:39 GMT
Hi Myrna,

Thanks for your comments. I'll roll your suggestions into the next rev 
of this test, after the current patch is committed. Responses follow. 
Cheers-Rick

Myrna van Lunteren (JIRA) wrote:

>    [ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-516?page=comments#action_12356026 ] 
>
>Myrna van Lunteren commented on DERBY-516:
>------------------------------------------
>
>I would suggest a little helpful addition in java/testing/README.html with a link to the
current junit hosting site. 
>(like how the reference to jakarta-oro* is done)
>  
>

OK.

>I would suggest also Building.txt to have specify that junit.jar is needed to build and
run, so instead of what you have currently:
>"JUnit is needed for some of Derby's tests" I suggest:
>"JUnit is needed to build and run some of Derby's tests"
>  
>

OK.

>I have tested derbynetmats, and tested jdbcapi/CompatibilityTest.java separately with
-Dframework=DerbyNet and =DerbyNetClient and that seems to work fine. And I was using jdk142.
>  
>

Thanks.

>Can you explain the need for jdk15 (according to the projecthelp)? Maybe I missed this...
>  
>

1.5 is just one of Derby's supported platforms. Since some Derby jdbc 
behavior is vm-specific, I want to make sure we cover the 1.5 vm along 
with 1.3 and 1.4.

>Finally some meanderings:
>I have been wondering about the name of the test - CompatibilityTest just seemed a little
generic, but I have no better alternative. :-)
>Also wondered whether we should add something about junit.jar to the web page http://db.apache.org/derby/derby_downloads.html#Software+required+to+build+Derby
>but as it's only required to for the ant all target, not the default target, I can accept
the current structure too. :-)
>Finally I also wondered if maybe these tests ought to be not under org/apache/derbyTesting/functionTests/tests/compatibility,
but under org/apache/derbyTesting/JUnitTests/compatibility...
>  
>

I don't have strong religion about these points either. Concerning the 
last issue: I agree that a JUnitTests fork in the tree might help us 
track which of our existing tests we've migrated under JUnit.

>Myrna
>
>  
>


Mime
View raw message