<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 9:27 AM, Karel Piwko <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:kpiwko@redhat.com" target="_blank">kpiwko@redhat.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="im">On Thu, 18 Jul 2013 18:58:01 +0200<br>
Matthias Wessendorf <<a href="mailto:matzew@apache.org">matzew@apache.org</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
> On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 4:16 PM, Karel Piwko <<a href="mailto:kpiwko@redhat.com">kpiwko@redhat.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> > On Tue, 16 Jul 2013 12:18:40 -0300<br>
> > Douglas Campos <<a href="mailto:qmx@qmx.me">qmx@qmx.me</a>> wrote:<br>
> ><br>
> > > Thanks Karel for the well balanced email.<br>
> > ><br>
> > > This discussion will never reach an agreement, because it's a biased<br>
> > > discussion, and we do have personal preferences involved - I for one<br>
> > > can't stand Groovy.<br>
> ><br>
> > We need to reach at some for of (temporary) agreement. QE needs to continue<br>
> > developing tests and so far we are simply "stuck" in the middle of<br>
> > discussion<br>
> > whether to continue with current tooling or not.<br>
> ><br>
><br>
><br>
> My current preference is - long term - using Java.<br>
><br>
> IMO this does NOT need to be ported now, as we speak, but soon.<br>
<br>
</div>Sounds like a plan. We'll continue sending PRs in Groovy and revisit the code<br>
early Sep then.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>+1</div><div><br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
><br>
><br>
> After my vacation (End of August / early Sep.) I am happy to help porting<br>
> the tests to Java, but not now.<br>
><br>
><br>
> -Matthias<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> ><br>
> > ><br>
> > > And that's the reason I strongly advocate for keeping it to Java - this<br>
> > > is a Groovy vs Java, while it should've been X vs Java - Scala specs2,<br>
> > > RSpec (via JRuby), Jasmine or Mocha (via DynJS or Rhino) - Heck, even<br>
> > > Clojure would be easier to work than Java.<br>
> ><br>
> > Cradle of best Czech beer for anybody who adds Arquillian support into<br>
> > Jasmine or Mocha ;-)<br>
> ><br>
> > ><br>
> > > Unless we have a broad discussion over all those languages (which<br>
> > > honestly I don't think we have time for that) we should stick to the<br>
> > > lowest common denominator, which is (unfortunately) Java.<br>
> > ><br>
> > > fwiw, I can see the value of s/Groovy/dynamic JVM lang for tests/ - any<br>
> > > of them would fit the bill - what I can't let go is the partiality of<br>
> > > the debate.<br>
> > ><br>
> > > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 01:03:43PM +0200, Karel Piwko wrote:<br>
> > > > Hi,<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > let me summarize the discussion from previous threads:<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > What were testing requirements?<br>
> > > > * Do not mock<br>
> > > > * Cover both backend and frontend testing at the same time<br>
> > > > * Control test env from tests/Maven, so it runs on both CI and local<br>
> > machine<br>
> > > > without any setup required<br>
> > > > => Those 3 requirements limited us to use Arquillian<br>
> > > > * Cover unified push server specifications in readable way<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > Why Groovy instead of Java?<br>
> > > > + Better support for JSON<br>
> > > > + Spock provides very nice BDD support<br>
> > > > + Still supports anything Java would do<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > What problems we faced with Groovy?<br>
> > > > - Needs specific compiler - solved, configured for tests only<br>
> > > > - Needs support in IDE - Intellij - ootb, Eclipse and NetBeans have<br>
> > > > plugins<br>
> > > > - Needs to be deployed in test deployment - not addressed now,<br>
> > prolongs test<br>
> > > > execution by few seconds per deployment<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > What are currently raised concerns?<br>
> > > > - Different language for development and testing<br>
> > > > - Raises bar for newcomers willing to write tests<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > Thank you for additional advantages, concerns or proving some of those<br>
> > are<br>
> > > > not valid.<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > Karel<br>
> > > > _______________________________________________<br>
> > > > aerogear-dev mailing list<br>
> > > > <a href="mailto:aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org">aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org</a><br>
> > > > <a href="https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev" target="_blank">https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev</a><br>
> > ><br>
> ><br>
> > _______________________________________________<br>
> > aerogear-dev mailing list<br>
> > <a href="mailto:aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org">aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org</a><br>
> > <a href="https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev" target="_blank">https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev</a><br>
> ><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
aerogear-dev mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org">aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev" target="_blank">https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br>Matthias Wessendorf <br><br>blog: <a href="http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/" target="_blank">http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/</a><br>
sessions: <a href="http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf" target="_blank">http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf</a><br>twitter: <a href="http://twitter.com/mwessendorf" target="_blank">http://twitter.com/mwessendorf</a>
</div></div>