[aerogear-dev] [Android] Android project structure for final

[Matthias Wessendorf]

On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 1:47 PM, Kris Borchers <kris at redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Mar 1, 2013, at 7:44 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew at apache.org> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 1:40 PM, Kris Borchers <kris at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mar 1, 2013, at 7:16 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew at apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 12:59 PM, Kris Borchers <kris at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mar 1, 2013, at 12:38 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew at apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 2:02 AM, Douglas Campos <qmx at qmx.me> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 28/02/2013, at 20:07, Summers Pittman <supittma at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> aerogear-android-tests: This will house all of the Aerogear tests for
>>>>>>>> Android.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You mean moving all the tests? Can't this be only for integration tests, and the unit tests stay on the aerogear-android project?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'd also prefer to have the unit tests for each of the libs
>>>>>> (aerogear-android + aerogear-android-support) being in there.
>>>>>
>>>>> I can see one reason to have the unit tests in a separate project. I assume both aerogear-android and aerogear-android-support would have pretty much identical tests since their functionality should
>>>>> be the same, right? It would be a pain to have to maintain multiple sets of the same tests across projects.
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Not sure about the details, BUT... you misread.
>>>
>>> I don't think I did.
>>>>
>>>> Unit tests belong to the library. I am -1000 on having a 'unit test'
>>>> only broject.
>>>
>>> Normally I would agree with this but what I'm saying is that this is a unique situation. These libraries will have the same functionality unless I'm misunderstanding the point of separating aerogear-android and aerogear-android-support. I'm mostly just pointing out the fact that these projects will likely have identical unit test suites so maintaining them will be a pain.
>>
>> not sure, if they are similar :) But... moving the unit tests into a
>> separate project, increases the fact that they are not executed, when
>> doing work on the library
>
> Agree. Again, just being devil's advocate on the mailing list as I tend to do. :) Just want to make sure we look at all points of view and really think things through before implementation.


+1


>>
>>> That is all. If Summers and any other Android folks don't mind maintaining two identical test suites in different projects, fine by me.
>>>>
>>>> Integration tests are different, they _should_ be separated
>>>
>>> Agree
>>>>
>>>> -M
>>>>
>>>>>> Only integration tests should be a totally independent project,
>>>>>> consuming the other libs (aerogear-android + aerogear-android-support)
>>>>>> and having tests against em.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -M
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -- qmx
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>>>>>>> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>>>>
>>>>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>>>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>>>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>>>>>> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>>>>> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>>
>>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>>>> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>>> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>
>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> aerogear-dev mailing list
> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev



-- 
Matthias Wessendorf

blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf