geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Bruce Snyder <>
Subject Re: [Testing] New test directory(s)
Date Tue, 12 Aug 2003 17:02:23 GMT
This one time, at band camp, Alex Blewitt said:

AB>At present, we only have one test directory in the source code. IMHO we 
AB>need at least two -- one for the unit tests, and one for the 
AB>Ideally code shouldn't get into CVS unless the unit tests run 100%; 
AB>however, (naturally) we'd expect the use-cases to start off at 0% and 
AB>climb ever towards 100% as the lifetime of the project goes on.

You're preaching to the choir here ;-). I'm a big believer in this
stategy as well because I've used it in the past and I've seen the
benefit in productivity. But I'm also a big believer in the test first
methodology. For me, writing tests before I ever write the code saves
me a lot of refactoring time.

AB>Can someone set up the Maven project structure to have the two types of 
AB>test? If we can't have two test directories for source code, then can 
AB>we agree on a naming convention like org.apache.geronimo for unit 
AB>tests, and usecase.Xxx or test.Xxx (such as 
AB>usecase.j2ee.ejb.DeploymentUseCase) to allow the two to be separated?

There's already a directory structure like so: 


We need to keep all the tests in their respective package structure for
the testing of protected and package scoped objects. I suggested earlier
that we add:


which is where the specification tests will live. Is this acceptable? 

AB>Also, if use-case tests are going to be different from unit-tests, do 
AB>we want to use/allow a different suffix other than

How about * 

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

View raw message