Mailing-List: contact dev-help@streams.incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@streams.incubator.apache.org
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2016 13:11:37 -0600
From: sblackmon <sblackmon@apache.org>
To: dev@streams.incubator.apache.org
Message-ID: <etPan.5852eae9.2d949716.94bb@apache.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAOtpBjgAzLYaFdn0pDGcOQ_xCcwcgjqup8EQbVOeQBrQAWHzyA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <etPan.5839b5a8.753043d1.3da@apache.org>
 <CAOtpBjgAzLYaFdn0pDGcOQ_xCcwcgjqup8EQbVOeQBrQAWHzyA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Switch from JUnit to TestNG for failsafe
 integration testing.
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="5852eae9_522a6f56_94bb"
archived-at: Thu, 15 Dec 2016 19:11:46 -0000

--5852eae9_522a6f56_94bb
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

This is just about wrapped up - the last PR to merge is

https://github.com/apache/incubator-streams-examples/pull/23

Also relevant to release prep is

https://github.com/apache/incubator-streams/pull/342

With those merged all unit and integration tests should be passing.

I=E2=80=99d like to merge these by tomorrow to prepare us to start the ne=
xt release this weekend.

Steve
On November 26, 2016 at 1:21:57 PM, Suneel Marthi (smarthi=40apache.org) =
wrote:

+1 to this proposal, we should standardize on one test framework across t=
he =20
project from what's presently out there. =20

On Sat, Nov 26, 2016 at 11:17 AM, sblackmon <sblackmon=40apache.org> wrot=
e: =20

> =20
> Hello, =20
> =20
> I propose that we bind failsafe plugin to TestNG rather than JUnit =20
> project-wide. =20
> =20
> The reason is simple - TestNG supports placing tests into groups and =20
> declaring dependencies that determine which order all tests in the modu=
le =20
> run in - and JUnit does not. =20
> =20
> Consider the following scenario - a provider module test plan includes =
the =20
> following: =20
> a) collect documents =20
> b) validate the collected documents against their upstream schema(s) =20
> c) convert the collected documents to activity and activity object =20
> schema(s) =20
> d) validate the converted documents, using an appropriate validator for=
 =20
> each verb and object type =20
> =20
> If we have the ability to specify the order of test execution, that tes=
t =20
> plan might be 2, 3, 4, or more separate test classes. =20
> =20
> If not, all of that mostly orthogonal testing has to be corralled into =
a =20
> single test class just to ensure proper order of execution. =20
> =20
> All of our provider and persist module can have more complex yet more =20
> simply organized tests using this model. =20
> =20
> As for surefire plugin for unit testing, I=E2=80=99m ambivalent - I wou=
ld think we =20
> can leave it on JUnit unless there=E2=80=99s a clear benefit to switchi=
ng it also. =20
> =20
> Making the switch should be easy - =20
> 1) remove org.junit imports in every class ending with IT =20
> 2) import the corresponding org.testng.annotations instead. =20
> 3) swap the failsafe binding in the streams-master pom =20
> 4) confirm the same number of tests run during integration-test and all=
 =20
> still pass. =20
> =20
> Any objections or related ideas to consider=3F =20
> =20
> Steve =20
> =20
> =20
> =20
> =20
> =20

--5852eae9_522a6f56_94bb--