harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alex Blewitt" <alex.blew...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [testing] metadata approach
Date Fri, 28 Jul 2006 19:49:57 GMT
> The question I'd like to raise now is – aren't we ready for TestNG
> right now? For example, we could replace our harness from jUnit to
> TestNG and lazily start converting of some failing and platform
> dependent tests to javadoc version of TestNG.
>
> Thought? Suggestions? Opposite opinions?

I think that if the decision is made to go down the TestNG route (and
my hope is that we will) then this sounds like a good approach. Of
course, everyone would have to be happy at the migration (sounds like
we're heading towards a vote on it) and like you say, we can always
use the TestNG harness to run the existing set of JUnit tests, so we
should still be in the same position.

As for the metadata decisions (e.g. platforms) there still seems to be
some ways we can achieve this. Do we want to finish deciding that
before the migration, or are we confident that we will get to a point
where a decision is made and we can start transitioning beforehand?

Lastly, do we have entries (e.g. on the wiki) about how to write new
tests that are either (a) compatible with JUnit+TestNG, or (b) use
TestNG alone? It seems like this would  be a good way to ensure new
tests are TestNG-compatible and thus increase the coverage of TestNG
tests. We probably also need to have pointers at least for how to run
the tests from My Favourite IDE (tm) and/or the build itself.

Are there any other systems e.g. JUnitReport that we need to consider
for this? Does TestNG's reporting suit what we want to do and/or can
we leverage any of the reporting that it does on the web?

Alex.
Mime
View raw message