On Tue, 16 Jul 2013 12:18:40 -0300
Douglas Campos <qmx@qmx.me> wrote:

> Thanks Karel for the well balanced email.
>
> This discussion will never reach an agreement, because it's a biased
> discussion, and we do have personal preferences involved - I for one
> can't stand Groovy.

We need to reach at some for of (temporary) agreement. QE needs to continue
developing tests and so far we are simply "stuck" in the middle of discussion
whether to continue with current tooling or not.

>
> 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.

Cradle of best Czech beer for anybody who adds Arquillian support into
Jasmine or Mocha ;-)

>
> 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.
>
> 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@lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>

_______________________________________________
aerogear-dev mailing list
aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev