harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From George Harley <george.c.har...@googlemail.com>
Subject Re: [testing] Peace (was: Re: svn commit: r419522 - in /incubator/harmony/enhanced/classlib/trunk/modules/nio: .classpath build.xml make/hyproperties.xml src/test/java/common/ src/test/java/common/org/ src/test/java/linux/ src/test/java/org/ src/test
Date Wed, 26 Jul 2006 11:00:36 GMT
Richard Liang wrote:
> Vladimir Ivanov wrote:
>> The more I work with our tests the more I see that managing tests via
>> directory layout is worse than using metadata.
>>
> Agree :-)
>
>> I thought about three more characteristics we might want to mark-up 
>> tests
>> with:
>> - Platform-specific unit tests
>> - Harmony implementation test vs. API tests
>> - Broken buggy tests
>> - Tests failing due to bug in implementation
>> - [Potentially in future] type of test - unit, functional, stress,
>> reliability, etc.
>> - [Potentially in future] regression test
>> - Each of the listed above can be:
>> - OS-specific
>> - Processor architecture-specific
>> NEW – Test should be executed only in separate JVM
>>
>> NEW – Long running test
>>
>> NEW – Non-re-enterable test
>>
>> We already have "only in separate VM" tests, for example
>> org/apache/harmony/logging/tests/java/util/logging/LogManagerTest.java
>>
>> *Long running– we might want to mark-up such tests sometime later 
>> when we
>> have long-running tests and do not want to execute them in quick
>> pre-integration testing for example.
>>
>> *Non-re-enterable – we might want to mark-up such tests when we try to
>> re-use unit tests in unusual modes – for example for reliability or 
>> stress
>> testing purposes.
>
> Wow, so sophisticated! But would you please integrate this with 
> George's proposal[1], so that we could have a common discussion base? 
> Thanks a lot.
>
> [1]http://www.mail-archive.com/harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org/msg10229.html 
>
>
> Best regards,
> Richard
>

Hi,

I've just caught up with this thread and want to echo the "wow!" on the 
thought that Vladimir has put into this. The thread referred to by 
Richard has pretty much settled into a discussion of how we could 
specify different test configurations using Ant and TestNG. It would be 
good to hear about the capabilities of JUnit 4.0 (or other alternatives) 
as well which I think Vladimir mentioned in an earlier post.

+1 for merging these separate threads into a single, new discussion.

Best regards,
George

>>
>> thanks, Vladimir
>>
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
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