geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Bruce Snyder <>
Subject RE: [Testing] Testing
Date Tue, 12 Aug 2003 16:01:33 GMT
This one time, at band camp, Tim Anderson said:

TA>The JMS CTS ( does something similar,
TA>except that rather than using section numbers, it associates
TA>an identifier with each requirement.
TA>A requirement can then be associated with multiple sections of
TA>the JMS spec, useful when a requirement is covered in multiple
TA>It also saves on verbosity, which helps if more than one test
TA>case tests a requirement.
TA>All requirements are maintained in a .xml file e.g.:
TA>   ...
TA>  <reference referenceId="section.6.11.1">
TA>    <section name="6.11.1" title="Durable Topic Subscriber" />
TA>  </reference>
TA>   ...
TA>  <requirement requirementId="subscriber.durable.unique">
TA>    <description>
TA>      Only one session at a time can have a TopicSubscriber for a
TA>      particular durable subscription.
TA>    </description>
TA>    <referenceId>section.6.11.1</referenceId>
TA>    <referenceId>section.4.3.2</referenceId>
TA>  </requirement>
TA>And referenced in code using the @jmscts.requirement tag e.g:
TA>    /**
TA>     * Verifies that creating a duplicate durable subscriber in the same
TA>     * session throws JMSException
TA>     *
TA>     * @jmscts.requirement subscriber.durable.unique
TA>     * @throws Exception for any error
TA>     */
TA>    public void testDuplicateSubscriberPerSession() throws Exception {

Actually, now that I see this, I do think that it flows better. I like the
fact that the code is less littered. My previous objection was regarding
the maintenane of two files. However, this was more in regards to creating
the file ahead of time. If the requirements.xml was maintained as part
of the development of the tests, this would certainly be manageable.

Tim, how do you handle the previous concern raised by Alex where a single
requirement spanning many pages is covered by many test cases? Also, how
do you handle the difference between the Javadoc and the requirements.xml
<description> element when generating a report? It seems that an HTML
generated report should contain the documentation, but which one should
it include if the two are different?

perl -e 'print unpack("u30","<0G)U8V4\@4VYY9&5R\"F9E<G)E=\$\!F<FEI+F-O;0\`\`");'

View raw message