[arquillian-issues] [JBoss JIRA] (ARQ-918) Pick a better name for testable attribute on @Deployment annotation

[Dan Allen (JIRA)]

    [ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ARQ-918?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12691672#comment-12691672 ] 

Dan Allen edited comment on ARQ-918 at 5/10/12 2:47 AM:
--------------------------------------------------------

Several suggestions have come up that indicate to me I need to clarify what behavior we're attempting to control.

* testMode = TestMode.CLIENT etc...
* runMode = ArquillianRunMode.IN_CONTAINER|CLIENT|CLIENT_ENRICHED
* Do the 'supports' and 'testing' bookends reinforce the meaning of 'inContainer' that much?

A deployment is "in container" by definition. We aren't trying to control whether or not its deployed to the container. Otherwise, we wouldn't be defining a deployment in the first place.

What we are trying to control is whether Arquillian adds its own infrastructure to the deployment (effectively repackaging it). That infrastructure adds extra services to the deployment that become available once the deployment is deployed. Those services are (as of now):

* a service to run tests in-container
* a service to monitor, analyze or execute callbacks on the server-side code

We are not trying to control how the tests are run. That behavior is controlled on the test class or test method using the @RunAsClient annotation. When absent, the default is to run the test "in-container" if the deployment supports in-container testing or "as client" if the deployment does not. (If there are multiple deployments, @OperateOnDeployment tells Arquillian which deployment to use for that test).

I'll summarize the three ways a deployment is packaged and the behavior it provides:

* Add the test infrastructure to the deployment - capable of running tests in-container (white box testing)
* Add instrumentation to the deployment - supports client testing w/ knowledge of internal state (gray box testing)
* Use the deployment exactly as it's defined - supports purely client testing (black box testing)

With that in mind, I have another proposal for how to control the packaging of these services:

{code}
@Deployment(testingServices = ALL | INSTRUMENTATION_ONLY | NONE)
{code}

or as a separate annotation

{code}
@Deployment
@TestingServices(NONE)
{code}

ALL could be IN_CONTAINER instead.
                
      was (Author: dan.j.allen):
    Several suggestions came up that indicate to me I need to clarify what behavior we're attempting to control.

* testMode = TestMode.CLIENT etc...
* runMode = ArquillianRunMode.IN_CONTAINER|CLIENT|CLIENT_ENRICHED
* Do the 'supports' and 'testing' bookends reinforce the meaning of 'inContainer' that much?

A deployment is "in container" by definition. We aren't trying to control whether or not its deployed to the container. Otherwise, we wouldn't be defining a deployment in the first place.

What we are trying to control is whether Arquillian adds its own infrastructure to the deployment (effectively repackaging it). That infrastructure adds extra services to the deployment that become available once the deployment is deployed. Those services are (as of now):

* a service to run tests in-container
* a service to monitor, analyze or execute callbacks on the server-side code

We are not trying to control how the tests are run. That behavior is controlled on the test class or test method using the @RunAsClient annotation. When absent, the default is to run the test "in-container" if the deployment supports in-container testing or "as client" if the deployment does not. (If there are multiple deployments, @OperateOnDeployment tells Arquillian which deployment to use for that test).

I'll summarize the three ways a deployment is packaged and the behavior it provides:

* Add the test infrastructure to the deployment - capable of running tests in-container (white box testing)
* Add instrumentation to the deployment - supports client testing w/ knowledge of internal state (gray box testing)
* Use the deployment exactly as it's defined - supports purely client testing (black box testing)

With that in mind, I have another proposal for how to control the packaging of these services:

{code}
@Deployment(testingServices = ALL | INSTRUMENTATION_ONLY | NONE)
{code}

or as a separate annotation

{code}
@Deployment
@TestingServices(NONE)
{code}

ALL could be IN_CONTAINER instead.
                  
> Pick a better name for testable attribute on @Deployment annotation
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: ARQ-918
>                 URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ARQ-918
>             Project: Arquillian
>          Issue Type: Enhancement
>      Security Level: Public(Everyone can see) 
>          Components: Base Implementation
>    Affects Versions: 1.0.0.Final
>            Reporter: Dan Allen
>
> @Deployment(testable = false) sends the wrong message for a testing platform and is subject to a wide variety of interpretations. We need a better name for this attribute.
> The purpose of this attribute is to determine if this deployment should be wrapped up based on the protocol so the test case can be executed inside the container.
> I'd be content if we gave it a very explicit name, even if that name wasn't tremendously fluent. Here are some suggestions:
> * transportsTest : Indicates whether this deployment will transport the test as part of the deployment so the it can be executed inside the container
> * testRunner : Indicates whether this deployment is itself a test runner, which by definition means it will be run inside the container
> * providesTestRunner : Mixed mode tests are possible, so this most accurately indicates whether this deployment will provide an additional test runner inside the container
> * hostsTest : Indicates whether the deployment will be a host to the test, so the test can be run inside the container
> * packageWithTest : Indicates whether this deployment will be packaged with the test and deployed to the server; when false, the deployment is left alone (not packaged with test)
> The hard part is that when the test is run in container, the @Deployment archive, the test and the test infrastructure often go into another archive that's the real deployment. So this is more of a directive of how to handle the @Deployment than it is about what role it will serve directly.
> I think that "testRunner" or "providesTestRunner" are the most clear options of the ones listed above.
> We can support this attribute as an alias to maintain backwards compatibility, marking testable as deprecated.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.jboss.org/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira