geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jason Dillon <>
Subject Re: Testsuite ready for action !
Date Tue, 21 Nov 2006 21:33:21 GMT
TestNG is more flexible than JUnit... it does not require that you  
extend from a specific base-class for tests, nor does it require that  
you name tests starting with test*(), though JUnit 4.0 might have  
removed that restriction.

TestNG can also use an xml configuration file to control which tests  
are executed, so you can tailor a specific suite of tests easily.   
Supports groups, so you can adorn a set of tests as performance, or  
integration, then only run tests that are in the same group.

It also supports configuration injection, so you can use a config  
file to pass in test specific data to change the behavior of the  
tests with out needing to change code, blah, blah.

I did peep at the JUnit 4.0 stuff a while ago, but at the time it  
still seemed like TestNG was more powerful and flexible... as well as  
portable to older JDKs.


On Nov 21, 2006, at 1:19 PM, Prasad Kashyap wrote:

> I don't know a whole lot of pros and cons of TestNG since I began
> using it recently myself.
> JUnit 3.8 didn't have a per-suite-once execution like TestNG
> (@BeforeSuite and @AfterSuite) did. So we began using it.
> JUnit 4.0 now does (@BeforeClass and @AfterClass) but yet it is highly
> restrictive. The @BeforeClass has to be a public void static method
> with no arguments. In our console-testsuite scenario, that wasn't of
> much help to me.
> I was told that there are other such nifty features but I'll let
> someone more knowledgeable answer that.
> Cheers
> Prasad.
> On 11/21/06, Jacek Laskowski <> wrote:
>> On 11/21/06, Prasad Kashyap <> wrote:
>> > Issue #2 is now fixed. All the tests in console-testsuites and
>> > deployment-testsuites now run and pass successfully. They  
>> continue to
>> > use TestNG. So these testsuites will serve as a good example for
>> > others wanting to use TestNG.
>> Will you be willing to tell us (me, particularly) what the pros and
>> cons of using TestNG are? In other words, shall we abandon junit for
>> testng completely because testng is what Geronimo, OpenEJB should be
>> using due to its better architecture, etc.? I'd like to give it a  
>> shot
>> in openejb and see how it could improve its bits.
>> Jacek
>> --
>> Jacek Laskowski

View raw message