harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tim Ellison <t.p.elli...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [classlib] Tests for serialization – which package, name?
Date Thu, 27 Apr 2006 15:48:58 GMT
Mikhail Loenko wrote:
> As I understand most of them now separated.

If they are 'mostly separated' then they are 'mixed' right ;-) ?
(only teasing)

> We may either 'leave them' or 'mixed' , not both :)
> 
> So what did you mean?

I mean don't treat them specially, mix them in with other tests.

Regards,
Tim

> 2006/4/27, Tim Ellison <t.p.ellison@gmail.com>:
>> I say leave them mixed.  We are no more likely to want to run
>> serialization tests separately than we are locking tests etc. and trying
>> to layout the tests on disk to represent all the different metadata
>> about each test case is not going to work.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Tim
>>
>> Stepan Mishura wrote:
>>> On 4/27/06, Geir Magnusson Jr  wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Stepan Mishura wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd like to discuss naming conventions for serialization tests - does
it
>>>>> make sense to separate serialization tests from unit tests?
>>>> I actually don't know.  What are the pros/cons?
>>>
>>> I'd propose to separate them. It seems to me that this approach more
>>> manageable and flexible, for example, we may wish in future to move
>>> serialization tests into separate test suite or we can select to run tests
>>> for serialization only, for example, if we update/improve serialization
>>> framework. Also we may put(force) some requirements how should test for
>>> serialization should like. This will unify serialization tests (for example,
>>> it may be done in a way like SerializationTest does or any other way. Right
>>> now I wouldn't want to argue whether it is good to create super class to be
>>> extended by test or not - it will be the next topic :-).)
>>> In case if we mix testing serialization functionality with tests for API
>>> methods then we won't have such opportunities.
>>>
>>> So the question was: does it make sense to keep serialization test separate
>>> or everybody OK with mixing them with unit tests for API methods?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Stepan.
>>>
>>> geir
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: harmony-dev-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Thanks,
>>> Stepan Mishura
>>> Intel Middleware Products Division
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------
>>> Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: harmony-dev-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org
>>>
>> --
>>
>> Tim Ellison (t.p.ellison@gmail.com)
>> IBM Java technology centre, UK.
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: harmony-dev-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: harmony-dev-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org
> 
> 

-- 

Tim Ellison (t.p.ellison@gmail.com)
IBM Java technology centre, UK.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: harmony-dev-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org


Mime
View raw message