Mailing-List: contact harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (asf.osuosl.org: 64.74.244.71 is neither permitted nor
 denied by domain of geir@pobox.com)
Message-ID: <43C64DAD.4080608@pobox.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 04:38:05 -0800
From: Geir Magnusson Jr <geir@pobox.com>
Reply-To: geir@pobox.com
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (Windows/20050923)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: regression test suite
References: 
 <OFC4ACA33D.81511539-ON802570F4.0033370C-802570F4.0035E4EA@uk.ibm.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <OFC4ACA33D.81511539-ON802570F4.0033370C-802570F4.0035E4EA@uk.ibm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


George Harley1 wrote:
> Hi, 
> 
> 
>>I think that regression tests should be marked in some way.
> 
> 
> Agreed.  But can we please *resist* the temptation to do this by 
> incorporating JIRA issue numbers into test case names (e.g. calling unit 
> test methods test_26() or test_JIRA_26()). I've seen this kind of approach 
> adopted in a couple of projects and, in my experience, it often leads to 
> the scattering of duplicated test code around the test harness.
> 
> Better, methinks, to either create a new test method with a meaningful 
> name or else augment an existing method - whatever makes more sense for 
> the particular issue. Then marking certain code as being for regression 
> test purposes could be done in comments that include the URL of the JIRA 
> issue. Perhaps an agreed tag like "JIRA" or "BUG" etc could be used as an 
> eye-catcher as well ?
> e.g. 
> 
> // BUG http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-26

This topic really has gained a life of it's own.  How about just a 
comment, like you say?

geir

> 
> 
> My 2 Euro Cents. 
> 
> Best regards, 
> George
> ________________________________________
> George C. Harley
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Mishura, Stepan M" <stepan.m.mishura@intel.com> 
> 12/01/2006 04:56
> Please respond to
> harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
> 
> 
> To
> <harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org>
> cc
> 
> Subject
> RE: regression test suite
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hello, 
> 
> Tim Ellison wrote: 
> 
> [snip]
> 
>>What is the useful distinction for regression tests being kept
> 
> separate?
> 
>>I can see that you may distinguish unit and 'system-level' tests just
>>because of the difference in frameworks etc. required, but why do I
> 
> care
> 
>>if the test was written due to a JIRA issue or test-based development
> 
> or
> 
>>someone who get's kicks out of writing tests to break the code?
>>
> 
> 
> I agree that separating regression tests doesn't make sense.
> However I think that regression tests should be marked in some way.
> This will signal a developer that a test was created to track already
> known issue. IMHO, a regression test should point out to a bug report
> and a bug report (after resolving a bug) should contain a reference to
> corresponding regression test in repository.
> 
> Thanks,
> Stepan Mishura
> Intel Middleware Products Division
> 
> 
>