[aerogear-dev] PushEE testing POC

[Bruno Oliveira]

Conventional tooling, I mean the common frameworks already existent into 
Java environment: JUnit...blah blah blah

If you think is the best and only Spock can solve our testing problem, 
it's ok. But to me is hard to maintain 2 languages into a single 
project. Java for development, Groovy for testing

If the argument is the BDD syntax, readability. I can achieve the same 
with Ruby :)

But if you guys are all comfortable with it, follow your heart if it's 
something specific to the push project.

Karel Piwko wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Jul 2013 10:22:37 -0300
> Bruno Oliveira<bruno at abstractj.org>  wrote:
>
>> Do we have a good reason to use Spock instead of conventional tools in
>> Java? Something that only spock can solve?
>
> Spock gives us BDD syntax, which I think is more readable for tests that are
> supposed to cover specifications.
>
> The technical reason to choose Groovy than Java was far superior support to
> JSON, with is used to define content of REST requests. Spock also added far
> better support for parametrized tests.
>
> What do you mean by conventional tooling? Groovy works in IDE (at
> leasts JBDS/Eclipse, IntelliJ), it is compatible with JUnit test runner, you
> can debug tests from IDE, and you can also do the same in setup it using Maven.
> Also, it runs on Travis without any external configuration required.
>
>> Our tests can be written in Java? Maybe I missed the point, but have a
>> project based in personal taste doesn't make sense to me.
>
> For tests that require managing test environment, such as preparing running
> server and running non-mocked tests in isolation, Java is the only language
> where appropriate tooling exists imho. Groovy is a syntax sugar to make it
> nicer.
>
>> I would love to write my tests with rspec and JRuby, which doesn't mean
>> I will start to do it.
>
> I'm not a Groovy fan, to make it clear. But I'm always trying to select the
> tool that fits the purpose the best, and according to the POC sent month ago
> Groovy and Spock was simply the best offering.
>
>> Corinne Krych wrote:
>>> Don't focus on Groovy (if it makes you sad), emphasis is on Spock!
>>>
>>> #HappyPuppy :)
>>>
>>> ++
>>> Corinne
>>> On Jul 14, 2013, at 4:34 AM, Douglas Campos<qmx at qmx.me>   wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 06:21:34PM +0200, Karel Piwko wrote:
>>>>> I have evaluated multiple API approaches, described here[3], Groovy and
>>>>> Spock seems to be the best to me.
>>>> And now I regret badly having missed the word "Groovy" between the
>>>> provided options when I've gone to review the push server codebase.
>>>>
>>>> #sadpanda :(
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> qmx
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>>>> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>>> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> aerogear-dev mailing list
> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

-- 
abstractj