river-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Peter Firmstone <j...@zeus.net.au>
Subject Re: Hudson build is back to normal : River-trunk-QA #51
Date Fri, 12 Nov 2010 00:59:36 GMT
Sim IJskes - QCG wrote:
> On 11/06/2010 11:29 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote:
>> If I were doing this sort of test migration, I would test the test by
>> modifying the code under test to introduce the bug it is testing for,
>> and consider the operation complete only when the test detects and
>> reports it.
> It might well be the only way to do it. Unless only the framework is 
> changed. We could go for a reporting backend that reports in junit 
> style? I've never worked with jtreg, is it cumbersome to use?
> Gr. Sim
Actually it's quite ok, just different, it has some good features, like 
multi jvm, policy's and detailed html reports.  It has more similarities 
to the qa suite than junit.  Junit's focus is for testing a single 
object or class.  The good thing about jtreg is that it's maintained by 
someone else, as opposed to our home grown qa suite, unique to Jini.

The issue we have is the multitude of different test methods, however 
that might be a blessing also, it gives wider test coverage. If we have 
everything running from ant (provided it works on all platforms, 
including Windows), you don't have to understand the test suite to run 
the tests, only to write them.



View raw message