Re: [jbpm-dev] jbpm human task core tests refactorings <- feedback plz!

@Marco: Hehe totally agree with the approach. I just don't want to make those reports looks better, I want to be sure that the code that we have is good. I've already migrated the changes to the transport projects, which it was easier than I thought, meaning that the changes doesn't affect too much. I will delete all the commented classes as well. I'm ready to push now, but I will wait for a while to see if I get more feedback. I'm confident with fixing issues with the callbacks if they appear. If you guys knows where the callbacks are being used in the jbpm-console please let me know. Cheers On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 12:48 PM, Marco Rietveld <mrietvel(a)redhat.com&gt;wrote: > Oh yeah: coverage reports. > > IMHO, coverage reports are like weather reports: good to check now and > then, but not something you want to plan around. > Also, wrt agile/efficiency, we're better off making sure that the tests > do actually test what we want them to -- which is pretty much exactly what > you've been doing, Mauricio. > > 11-05-12 11:36, Maciej Swiderski: > > +1 for cleaning up the test, it takes quite some time to run all of them. > > Regarding changes of package good to keep in mind: > - installer stuff that it declares DefaultUserGroupCallback in both > web.xml and jbpm.usergroup.callback.properties. > - human task war tests could declare... > > There should be LDAPUserInfo class that could go into identity package as > well. > > Coverage report look quite ok :) and improvement is always welcome. > > Cheers > Maciej > > 2012/5/11 Mauricio Salatino <salaboy(a)gmail.com&gt; > >> Sure, I will do that if all the other points make sense, and I will not >> push the commented out tests :) >> >> >> On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 12:04 PM, Marco Rietveld <mrietvel(a)redhat.com&gt;wrote: >> >>> Hi Mauricio, >>> >>> Feel free to delete the code instead of commenting it out, especially >>> if you can't use @Ignore. >>> >>> Commented out code is more often confusing than not. :) >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Marco >>> >>> 11-05-12 10:46, Mauricio Salatino: >>> >>> Hi guys, >>> I was working yesterday trying to understand why we have 390 test >>> running inside jbpm-human-task-core and if they are really necessary. >>> This is my initial approach so forgive me if I'm missing something, the >>> following notes and changes are what I found until now: >>> >>> 1) All the test classes using directly TaskClient should be removed, >>> now everything should go through TaskService and AsyncTaskService >>> test which are placed inside async and sync. For that reason all the >>> test inside org.jbpm.task.service are commented out. >>> I've checked that all the test classes that were using TaskClient now >>> has their correspondency inside the org.jbpm.task.service.base.async >>> package. >>> Where the only important change is from TaskClient to AsyncTaskService. >>> We were running the same tests for both wasting a lot of time. >>> Now the base.sync package tests everything using the TaskService >>> interface. Right now there are not the same tests for the sync and the >>> async interface but I can migrate them soon. >>> >>> >>> 2) Reviewing the org.jbpm.task.service package I found all the >>> UserGroupCallback tests and the class called BaseTestNoUserGroupSetup, >>> which basically run almost >>> all the test using no hardcoded users and using the UserCallbacks >>> resolutions. Talking yesterday with Tiho, we both agree that we should >>> remove the tests >>> that are using hardcoded users and just leave the one that are using >>> callbacks to avoid running unnecessary tests. Just doing this we will >>> remove a lot of overhead >>> and we can have a simplified way of organizing and running the tests. >>> I've moved all the UserGroupCallback tests to the async package and migrate >>> them to use the AsyncTaskService instead of the TaskClient. >>> >>> 3) I've created a package called org.jbpm.task.identity to place the >>> LDAP stuff which is ignored and the UserGroupCallBack stuff that is not >>> using the TaskService/TaskClient stuff, when I was doing that I notice that >>> those tests uses some properties files that needs to be placed inside the >>> same package structure to be picked up, for that reason I've moved two >>> classes inside src/main/java to the following new >>> package: org.jbpm.task.identity -> UserGroupCallbackManager, >>> UserGroupCallback, DefaultUserGroupCallbackImpl, LDAPUserGroupCallbackImpl, >>> which I believe that is better than have the UserGroupCallback stuff mixed >>> with the task.service stuff. I notice that the >>> package: org.jbpm.task.service is a wild area, that we should avoid as much >>> as possible. I know that this is a change that can impact in other modules >>> like the jbpm-console but I think that it will avoid future troubles. I >>> really need your feedback on this.. to see if you guys think that this can >>> cause a lot of troubles. >>> >>> 4) for the same reason as 1 I've commented out all the tests >>> inside org.jbpm.task.service.test, those were using the TaskClient and >>> because the async and sync test are already provided we don't miss >>> anything. The only thing that we need to do inside >>> the org.jbpm.task.service.test package is to align these tests to cover all >>> the base async and sync tests, which is not the case right now, but it's >>> simple to do it. >>> >>> 5) I've added covertura to the jbpm-human-task-core project to do an >>> initial analysis about what we are covering with our tests. Attached is the >>> initial chart that I would love to see improved in the following months :) >>> >>> >>> 6) I need to work on the other modules to propagate these changes as >>> well, but for doing that I need your feedback on the previous points, I >>> think that during the weekend I will be able to finish the other modules, >>> if we all are OK with this suggestions. >>> >>> Cheers >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com >>> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org >>> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar >>> >>> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio - >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> jBPM/Drools developer >>> Utrecht, the Netherlands >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com >> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org >> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar >> >> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio - >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> jbpm-dev mailing list >> jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev >> >> > > > -- > jBPM/Drools developer > Utrecht, the Netherlands > > -- - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com - Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -