jakarta-cactus-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "michael" <mich...@idtect.com>
Subject Acceptance (Functional) Testing - Cactus or HTTPUnit?
Date Wed, 14 Aug 2002 09:05:28 GMT
I'm working on a testing strategy for a new web application project.  We
haven't even finished requirements yet so it's the perfect time.  I see
a couple choices for acceptance testing:

0) Use HTTPUnit

  - Pros : closest to the end user

  - Cons : small changes in GUI require test changes, becoming a
maintenance problem.  Duplicates test logic in the tests for the Action
classes.

1) Use Cactus (testing the Struts Action classes), skipping the HTML/JSP
layer.  

  - Pros : small GUI changes do not affect tests

  - Cons : does not test HTML/JSP interface.  This could be done
manually and with a really good Cactus test of the Struts Action
classes, there would be small risk for the HTML.

Basically there is some overlap between testing the Action classes and
the HTML pages.  HTML changes will be more frequent than Java code
changes, requiring a lot of maintenance to keep Gui tests in sync. We
have a small project with a small staff so maintaining test cases is a
very important issue.  We don't have the luxury of having a customer who
will write the acceptance tests (does anyone?), nor do we have the
luxury of having a full time person responsible for tests.  So it will
be developers who will write and maintain the test cases.

I'm curious if any Cactus and/or HTTPUnit users have opinions one way or
the other.  

Michael


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:cactus-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:cactus-user-help@jakarta.apache.org>


Mime
View raw message