openjpa-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Michael Dick" <michael.d.d...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Move to TestNG?
Date Thu, 01 Feb 2007 21:01:04 GMT
For what it's worth Marc is right. I've used testng via the surefire plugin
as a front end to running jUnit tests. In my case I just tried to get them
to run in parallel, but we should be able to use groups in the same manner.

On 2/1/07, Marc Prud'hommeaux <mprudhom@apache.org> wrote:
>
>
> Here's a good article comparing TestNG with JUnit:
>
>     http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/j-cq08296/
>
> IMO, the groups feature is nice, but isn't necessarily sufficient to
> justify a lot of effort porting over tests (since we could always
> just check a system property before running expected failure tests or
> something). However, one feature that does sound very nice is their
> support for parametric testing. If I understand it correctly, this
> would allow us to automatically run tests against various data model
> implementations. This would be nice, because we could have a set of
> interfaces for data models and implementations that vary their
> mapping details (single-table mapping, table-per-class mapping,
> joined mapping, mappings with attributes in secondary tables, orm.xml
> mappings, etc), and transparently run the same tests against each of
> the data models. This would dramatically expand the completeness of
> our tests, since historically we have only done things like
> TestJustAFewSimpleOperationsAgaintCompositePrimaryKeyClasses,
> TestSomeOtherNuanceOfEmbeddedRelations, etc.
>
> Also, note that I don't think that using TestNG vs. JUnit is
> necessarily an xor proposition: I think that Maven's surefire harness
> can run against both frameworks simultaneously, and aggregate the
> test results. I'm not sure though.
>
> I'll play around with it a little bit today and let you all know the
> results.
>
>
>
> On Feb 1, 2007, at 11:08 AM, Patrick Linskey wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > According to the discussion at
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-123, it looks like
> > TestNG's concept of test groups could let us easily create tests that
> > are expected to fail, and exclude them from test runs until the
> > corresponding behavior is fixed / feature is implemented. What do you
> > guys think about moving to TestNG? I believe that the work involved is
> > minimal; there are some conversion tools / compatibility modes or
> > something.
> >
> > -Patrick
> >
> > --
> > Patrick Linskey
> > BEA Systems, Inc.
> >
> > ______________________________________________________________________
> > _
> > Notice:  This email message, together with any attachments, may
> > contain
> > information  of  BEA Systems,  Inc.,  its subsidiaries  and
> > affiliated
> > entities,  that may be confidential,  proprietary,  copyrighted
> > and/or
> > legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the
> > individual
> > or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended
> > recipient,
> > and have received this message in error, please immediately return
> > this
> > by email and then delete it.
>
>


-- 
-Michael Dick

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message