db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andreas Korneliussen <Andreas.Kornelius...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: Features of the JUnit test execution harness
Date Thu, 02 Feb 2006 09:35:41 GMT
Myrna van Lunteren wrote:
> On 1/31/06, *Kristian Waagan* <Kristian.Waagan@sun.com 
> <mailto:Kristian.Waagan@sun.com>> wrote:
>     Differences in output should be irrelevant. Although not what you
>     mentioned above, the issue of (execution) control is very relevant. The
>     logic for running the tests multiple times, each time with a different
>     setup/environment must be located somewhere. I think Andreas' proposal
>     of introducing a separate JUnit test type (see
>     http://www.nabble.com/running-JUnit-tests-t887682.html#a2300670) makes
>     sense, as it gives us more freedom w.r.t. handling of JUnit tests.
> Yes, that proposal made sense to me. I personally like the approach of 
> having a class for various/different configurations. Although that could 
> get out of hand.
> Does this 'throw away' the work that Rick is doing on DERBY-874?

I think the work currently done on DERBY-874 was mainly to improve the 
DerbyJUnitTest's JavaDoc, and to log exceptions. So I would not throw 
that away.

However I do propose to change DerbyJUnitTest to move out everything 
about configuration into a separate class.

> Following Andreas' approach we'd still be able to run the individual 
> tests separately, yes?

Yes - definetly.


View raw message