deltaspike-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gerhard Petracek <gerhard.petra...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Integration test structure #2
Date Mon, 30 Jan 2012 18:09:43 GMT
short addition:

imo it's easier/faster to discuss this special topic in our irc channel and
post a summary to the list.

@christian:
it's quite a long story - so i skipped the details for now to avoid that
dan spends a lot of time on it before mark or i have some time to answer
your mail properly.

regards,
gerhard



2012/1/30 Gerhard Petracek <gerhard.petracek@gmail.com>

> hi dan,
>
> thx! if you think about a) or b) mentioned by christian we should discuss
> it before you spend a lot of time on it. (because there are/were good
> reasons for not doing that.)
>
> @all:
> the only issues i saw (as well):
>  - right now "moving" resources is broken. e.g.
> /META-INF/activation_apache-deltaspike.properties ->
> /META-INF/apache-deltaspike.properties for using it just for some tests
> doesn't work - and that's what we will need a lot imo.
>  - the unpack trick is unstable on win, but afaik it works on linux.
>
> regards,
> gerhard
>
>
>
> 2012/1/30 Dan Allen <dan.j.allen@gmail.com>
>
>> I want to chime in just to let you know that I am looking into
>> recommendations for improving the testing structure as well.
>>
>> I don't have anything concrete yet, and will likely be playing around with
>> the suggestions Christian has laid out in addition to whatever comes to my
>> mind. I also need to talk to Andrew Rubinger, because he had some very
>> valuable suggestions for the JBoss AS testsuite that unfortunately didn't
>> get integrated the way he had hoped. Those ideas very likely apply here as
>> well.
>>
>> I'm very interested in finding the right approach for two important
>> reasons:
>>
>> - I'm obviously take great interest in integration testing ;)
>> - DeltaSpike will become a role model for how to apply Arquillian, and we
>> want to make sure it's the right role model
>>
>> By all means, continue to write tests. Just know that I do want to be sure
>> that the test suite is as friendly, sustainable and useful as possible.
>>
>> -Dan
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 12:29, Christian Kaltepoth
>> <christian@kaltepoth.de>wrote:
>>
>> > Hey @ all,
>> >
>> > I want to bring up the integration test structure topic again,
>> > especially because discussions regarding new modules are starting. I
>> > spent some time on the weekend to work on [1] and while doing this I
>> > came to the conclusion that the integration tests currently don't work
>> > very well.
>> >
>> > The main reason for the problems is the fact that the tests are
>> > currently split between the core-impl and integration-test modules.
>> > Most tests have been added to the core-impl module which contains
>> > Arquillian profiles for OWB and Weld. The integration-test module has
>> > only a few tests but also unpacks the tests of core-impl and executes
>> > them a second time. Beside the profiles for AS7 and Glassfish it also
>> > includes the OWB and Weld profiles. I ran into major problems getting
>> > the tests to work correctly in both modules mainly due to classpath
>> > clashes between different versions of apache-deltaspike.properties on
>> > the classpath.
>> >
>> > I really think we should try to optimize this structure so it runs
>> > more smoothly and doesn't execute the tests more than once. IMHO it
>> > makes no sense to have Arquillian tests in both core-impl and
>> > integration-test. I think we should go with one of the following two
>> > ways:
>> >
>> > A)
>> > Move all Arquillian tests from core-impl to the integration-test
>> > module so that core-impl only contains standard junit tests. So the
>> > integration tests are only executed in the integration-test module.
>> > This way we could also remove the OWB and Weld profiles from
>> > "parent-code". This structure has the advantage that the
>> > integration-test module could simply declare a dependency on the core
>> > module JAR which simplifies the Shrinkwrap packaging a lot.
>> >
>> > B)
>> > Move all the Arquillian tests to core-impl. The integration-test
>> > module would become dispensable in this case. All unit and integration
>> > tests go into the core-impl module and we simply move the AS7 and
>> > Glassfish profiles over there (as OWB and Weld are already present).
>> > Actually this wouldn't be much work because we would only have to move
>> > a few tests and the AS7/Glassfish profiles. Everything else is already
>> > there.
>> >
>> > I for myself would prefer A), but that's just my personal preference.
>> > What do you think regarding this? I would love to hear opinions! :)
>> >
>> > Christian
>> >
>> > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DELTASPIKE-63
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Christian Kaltepoth
>> > Blog: http://chkal.blogspot.com/
>> > Twitter: http://twitter.com/chkal
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Dan Allen
>> Principal Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
>> Registered Linux User #231597
>>
>> http://google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen
>> http://mojavelinux.com
>> http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
>>
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message