On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 5:18 PM, Douglas Campos <qmx(a)qmx.me> wrote:
Thanks Karel for the well balanced email.
This discussion will never reach an agreement,
yes
because it's a biased
discussion, and we do have personal preferences involved - I for one
can't stand Groovy.
And that's the reason I strongly advocate for keeping it to Java - this
is a Groovy vs Java, while it should've been X vs Java - Scala specs2,
RSpec (via JRuby), Jasmine or Mocha (via DynJS or Rhino) - Heck, even
Clojure would be easier to work than Java.
"easier" is also personal taste (I can't read the encrypted nature of
Clojure) :-)
Unless we have a broad discussion over all those languages (which
honestly I don't think we have time for that) we should stick to the
lowest common denominator, which is (unfortunately) Java.
This is also true.
I guess, not sure, it would make sense to "focus" or concentrate on Java,
for now ?
I am not really sure, what's the "best" (ha ha) option on this. However,
I think we do need a decision here...
fwiw, I can see the value of s/Groovy/dynamic JVM lang for tests/ -
any
of them would fit the bill - what I can't let go is the partiality of
the debate.
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 01:03:43PM +0200, Karel Piwko wrote:
> Hi,
>
> let me summarize the discussion from previous threads:
>
> What were testing requirements?
> * Do not mock
> * Cover both backend and frontend testing at the same time
> * Control test env from tests/Maven, so it runs on both CI and local
machine
> without any setup required
> => Those 3 requirements limited us to use Arquillian
> * Cover unified push server specifications in readable way
>
> Why Groovy instead of Java?
> + Better support for JSON
> + Spock provides very nice BDD support
> + Still supports anything Java would do
>
> What problems we faced with Groovy?
> - Needs specific compiler - solved, configured for tests only
> - Needs support in IDE - Intellij - ootb, Eclipse and NetBeans have
> plugins
> - Needs to be deployed in test deployment - not addressed now, prolongs
test
> execution by few seconds per deployment
>
> What are currently raised concerns?
> - Different language for development and testing
> - Raises bar for newcomers willing to write tests
>
> Thank you for additional advantages, concerns or proving some of those
are not
> valid.
>
> Karel
> _______________________________________________
> aerogear-dev mailing list
> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
--
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