harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alexei Zakharov" <alexei.zakha...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [testing] metadata approach
Date Tue, 01 Aug 2006 09:43:27 GMT
Hi Alex,

> 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?

Well, IMHO adding some extra javadoc tag will not break anything.
There are situations when you need some sticker just to put on test to
mark it as "implementation specific" for example since you will forget
everything in a week. I currently use some javadoc text like "This
test is highly implementation specific" or "@impl" tag to mark such
tests. But I would prefer to do it in a more standardized way.

ABout finishing deciding: we probably need to engage more people in
the discussion ...

> 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.

I don't think we have anything concerning TestNG on the wiki right
now. IMHO we still need everybody to accept the intention of moving to
the new harness before starting this activities.

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.

AFAIK there are TestNG plugins for Eclipse and IDEA but I haven't tried it yet.

> 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?

Basically TestNG built-in reporting system produces all necessary
information. But the resulting report doesn't look very nice and I
don't know how to customize it. Funny thing: the report looks nicer in
Mozilla than in IE.

On the other hand,  the use of JUnitReport is "officially approved" by
TestNG team - i.e. TestNG produces all necessary input stuff for
JUnitReport. JR is more powerfull report-generation system, we may
customize it's output with XSL sheets if we like (AFAIK). The default
style of reports generated by JUnitReport looks nicer.


Regards,

2006/7/28, Alex Blewitt <alex.blewitt@gmail.com>:
> > 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.
>


-- 
Alexei Zakharov,
Intel Middleware Product 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


Mime
View raw message