Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-open-jpa-dev-archive@locus.apache.org Received: (qmail 46072 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2007 02:01:59 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 7 Feb 2007 02:01:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 15845 invoked by uid 500); 7 Feb 2007 02:02:06 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-open-jpa-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 15821 invoked by uid 500); 7 Feb 2007 02:02:05 -0000 Mailing-List: contact open-jpa-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 15812 invoked by uid 99); 7 Feb 2007 02:02:05 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (140.211.11.133) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 06 Feb 2007 18:02:05 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of mprudhomapache@gmail.com designates 64.233.166.177 as permitted sender) Received: from [64.233.166.177] (HELO py-out-1112.google.com) (64.233.166.177) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 06 Feb 2007 18:01:55 -0800 Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id u52so29654pyb for ; Tue, 06 Feb 2007 18:01:34 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:content-type:message-id:content-transfer-encoding:from:subject:date:to:x-mailer:sender; b=Jeg6kLMsOrlpTYKmwJ3sD0FyuKPdkq/g9Cu+W4eB2Q6C++RFLI8z4IhfwIcMNYZHDPo7uWR4DJOBZV4mMO8rRiLNIgk1KQGX6HsW9ZCOiGpI/jeBFTx8tblV9/ezUJYOVA/BterMCJoAa8QCpPF2se6qjD1YVBKv2w/AmO/zDPs= Received: by 10.35.111.17 with SMTP id o17mr1136139pym.1170813694637; Tue, 06 Feb 2007 18:01:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?192.168.15.100? ( [66.248.222.34]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id j4sm388393nzd.2007.02.06.18.01.33; Tue, 06 Feb 2007 18:01:34 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.3) In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Marc Prud'hommeaux Subject: Re: TestNG vs. JUnit Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2007 18:01:10 -0800 To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.3) Sender: Marc Prud'hommeaux X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Craig- I mentioned an article earlier that I thought gave a pretty good introduction and comparison: http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/j-cq08296/ There's also a slew of other comparison articles listed at: http://testng.org/doc/misc.html I was going to experiment with making some TestNG cases with OpenJPA, but I got sidetracked. I hope to get back to playing around with it tomorrow. Once I've got something working, I'll post my impressions and recommendations on this list. On Feb 6, 2007, at 5:49 PM, Craig L Russell wrote: > Just when I thought I knew enough about JUnit to be dangerous > (productive) along comes another test framework. > > Can someone point us to the FAQ? Aside from tests that fail until a > bug is fixed, is there a good reason to switch to use TestNG for > openjpa? > > Craig > > Craig Russell > DB PMC > clr@apache.org http://db.apache.org/jdo > >