[jbossws-dev] JBossWS testsuite reorganization

Folks, with current development on jbossws trunk aimed at version 5, I believe it's time consider rethinking the testsuite a bit. Current status -------------------- Historically, we've been running the integration tests against a JBoss AS container that has to be started before the testsuite. The target container is a vanilla distribution that suits with most of the tests, except for few ones requiring a https connector or a specific security domain to be available. Implementations of the org.jboss.wsf.spi.deployer.Deployer interface are available for each target container and allow deploying test archives as well as setting security domains / https connector by internally relying on the container management API. Different maven profiles trigger different implementations of Deployer (due to different artifact dependencies / classpath), allowing running the testsuite the same way against different target containers. When it comes to continuous integration, the idea is that a QA job first updates a target container with the current jbossws libraries, then it starts the container and runs the jbossws testsuite against it. Issues / reasons for changing --------------------------------------- The current approach is working pretty much fine, but suffers from some limitations: * it needs a container to be already running when the integration test is triggered; it would be great if we could have the container started / stopped by the test itself * we're limited to running the testsuite against a predefined container profile (standalone.xml, standalone-full.xml ): while most of the tests makes sense when run against standalone.xml profile (because the webservices subsystem is on in it), we have some tests requiring subsystems available on different profiles (for instance, the messaging subsystem which is in standalone-full.xml or the xts subsystem which is in standalone-xts.xml). Currently we run the testsuite in Spring mode against standalone-full.xml, basically because till CXF 2.7.x the SOAP-over-JMS implementation has been available with Spring only. That's not the case anymore, on CXF 3.0.0, so we'd likely have to test it in both spring and non-spring mode, but that needs the messaging subsystem which is not in standalone.xml * we have few tests (but might have more in future) that actually require further additional changes to the server; that includes adding users, messaging queues, setting server side system properties at boot, ... The only way to achieve that atm is to have the QA job run a CLI script to modify the server or set a system property on command line when starting the server jvm * we have tests affecting the server management model, for instance changing the way the webservices subsystem model rewrites wsdl soap:address attributes; that makes it impossible to run those tests at the same time of any other tests Proposals / idea --------------------- I'm listening to proposals to revisit the way the testsuite is run and better address the point above. Something I've been thinking about is relying on Arquillian, similarly to what the WFLY testsuite does. What's not trivial is the fact that we still need to have different version of the Arquillian SPI implementation (that is, different WFLY / EAP versions) used depending on a maven profile specified when running the testsuite; moreover we also need to be able to run against the result of building the latest WFLY master (iow, not a released target for which a wildfly-arquillian-container-xyz is available on the repository). We could have custom server profile files (standalone-abc.xml) in the jbossws sources for the supported containers to be used for starting specific versions of the containers through Arquillian. The integration tests could be split into groups meant to run against the various different profiles of the selected target container. Pretty much anything we need to customize on the server that can't be done using the Deployer approach can actually be done through a proper profile file (I would still keep the Deployer approach when working to limit the number of profile files to maintain, as there's a lot of stuff in there). Actually, we could even think about having a prepare phase before the actual testsuite that runs given CLI scripts to obtain the desired profile configuration. Next steps --------------- Please provide feedback / ideas. Then we need a plan and eventually jiras created. Cheers Alessio -- Alessio Soldano Web Service Lead, JBoss