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

On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 1:40 PM, Kris Borchers <kris(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > > On Mar 1, 2013, at 7:16 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt; wrote: > >> On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 12:59 PM, Kris Borchers <kris(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >>> >>> On Mar 1, 2013, at 12:38 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt; wrote: >>> >>>> On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 2:02 AM, Douglas Campos <qmx(a)qmx.me&gt; wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On 28/02/2013, at 20:07, Summers Pittman <supittma(a)redhat.com&gt; 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

> 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(a)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(a)lists.jboss.org >>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> aerogear-dev mailing list >>> aerogear-dev(a)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(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)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(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev