Mailing-List: contact derby-dev-help@db.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: <derby-dev@db.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: local policy)
Date: Fri, 03 Nov 2006 12:37:03 +0100
From: Julius Stroffek <Julius.Stroffek@Sun.COM>
Subject: Re: Adding a new test
In-reply-to: <wjo8slh1hoju.fsf@sun.com>
Sender: Julius.Stroffek@Sun.COM
To: derby-dev@db.apache.org
Message-id: <454B29DF.3060709@sun.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
References: <4549F0CF.3050503@sun.com> <wjo8slh1hoju.fsf@sun.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 (X11/20060911)

Knut Anders Hatlen wrote:
> Hi Julo,
>
> It is perfectly OK to add a new test case to the derbynet/testProtocol
> test. That test is actually an assertion based test which should be
> fairly easy to convert into JUnit later, and I don't think adding a
> new test case to it will slow down the transition to JUnit.
>   
Hi Knut,

I can't do this. Because the test will create two JDBC connections to 
the same server
to different databases and executes some queries on both. It will not 
test the DRDA
on such a lower level like derbynet/testProtocol does.

I'm thinking of creating a new package for junit tests - 
org.apache.derbyTesting.functionTests.extra.
The test also should not be a part of jdbcapi testing because it has nothing
common with jdbcapi interface itself except it uses it.

I have already created this test as a junit test and there is only a 
question where
to place this test.

Cheers

Julo