Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-geronimo-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 66219 invoked by uid 500); 11 Aug 2003 23:04:22 -0000 Mailing-List: contact geronimo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Reply-To: geronimo-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list geronimo-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 66151 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2003 23:04:21 -0000 Received: from amsfep12-int.chello.nl (213.46.243.18) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 11 Aug 2003 23:04:21 -0000 Received: from ed.vocodomain1.vocognition.com ([24.132.247.243]) by amsfep12-int.chello.nl (InterMail vM.5.01.05.17 201-253-122-126-117-20021021) with ESMTP id <20030811230426.HEVT1274.amsfep12-int.chello.nl@ed.vocodomain1.vocognition.com>; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 01:04:26 +0200 Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2003 01:04:21 +0200 From: Ed Letifov X-Mailer: The Bat! (v1.61) Reply-To: Ed Letifov X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <62123194003.20030812010421@chello.nl> To: Bruce Snyder CC: geronimo-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re[2]: [PATCH] JUnit test for org.apache.geronimo.cache.SimpleInstanceCache In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Hello Bruce, EL>> Anyway, the test is in the attachment. As I said before: started with EL>> the simplest, hope it helps. BS> I can certainly commit this test as I'll be writing a bunch of these BS> later tonight. Thank you, but still, how does one submit multiple new files? As a jar archive to achieve portability and preserve directory/package structure? Also, for the future, should the @author tags be specified? I don't mind an impersonal collective ownership at all, but I can imagine someone bugging you someday, since you will be the one actually performing commit. BS> However, I'd like to try to make a decision on what we're BS> going to do to to determine spec coverage first. Although spec coverage BS> is crucial, we also just need some simple test coverage of the existing BS> code base. Understood. I guess while you are making this decision having the simple test coverage growing won't hurt? BS> I'm wondering if there's a need for two kinds of tests - unit and BS> spec. Of course, these two can be achieved in the same *Test.java files BS> and separated simply by a comment line. I personally like the 'separate spec test' idea more, but I have to admit that a gut feeling exists that it will end up in the same files, and moreover without that comment line. -- Best regards, Ed mailto:e.letifov@chello.nl