maven-doxia-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Lukas Theussl <>
Subject Re: Confluence module outstanding issues...
Date Fri, 26 Oct 2007 09:24:26 GMT

Forgot to mention: for a confluence sink there is a feature request open 
(DOXIA-124), any interest in writing one? :)


Lukas Theussl wrote:
> Dave Syer wrote:
>> I already took that approach with the patch I submitted for 
>> DOXIA-169.  The
>> test actually goes beyond the one for the APT version.  Also, the APT one
>> uses AptSink to accept output and make assertions about it.  There is no
>> ConfluenceSink so I used TextSink - which I think is a better approach
>> anyway because I wouldn't want the test case to tightly couple the 
>> *Parser
>> and *Sink.
> Absolutely. I think in the apt case, the apt sink is only used to test 
> some special features, like macros, but in general, testing a parser 
> should not depend on a particular sink, and vice versa (see eg 
> DOXIA-100, DOXIA-101 for cases we have fixed already).
>> I can't write the whole test suite in one go, and I'm not sure why that
>> would help (all the tests would fail to start with), but we can do it 
>> bit by
>> bit if you like, one feature at a time.
> I mainly meant that it would help me to get familiar with the confluence 
> format. It would also be good to have a standard test document for each 
> parser, since then we can compare the parsing output with any arbitrary 
>  test sink, eg the TextSink.
> I don't see why all the tests would fail first, because the 
> AbstractParserTest by itself doesn't assert anything (apart some basic 
> well-formedness), it only parses the document so as long as parsing is 
> fine, you won't break anything.
> -Lukas
>> Lukas Theussl-3 wrote:
>>> Hi Dave,
>>> I am a currently active doxia committer but I'm not really familiar 
>>> with the confluence module. If you submit some patches I will review 
>>> them, what would help me most as a start would be a complete 
>>> confluence test model test.confluence, to replace the current one in 
>>> src/test/resources/. It should produce the same text output as the 
>>> corresponding test files test.apt and test.xml in the apt and xdoc
>>> modules.
>>> Cheers,
>>> -Lukas
>>> Dave Syer wrote:
>>>> Is anyone actively involved in developing the Confluence module right
>>>> now? Several issues have been raised this week (some by me), but 
>>>> no-one seems
>>>> to
>>>> be reviewing them, or working on them.  Some are really trivial.

View raw message