[aerogear-dev] PushEE testing POC

[Matthias Wessendorf]

On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 1:42 PM, Karel Piwko <kpiwko at redhat.com> wrote:

> Seems to me that we might agree on moving tests into separate repository


+1


> for
> now while making them a part of src/test of the project itself once we
> stabilize testing tools.
>

please no INTEGRATION tests in src/test



-M


> Comments inline.
>
> Karel
>
> On Tue, 21 May 2013 11:11:42 +0200
> Matthias Wessendorf <matzew at apache.org> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 9:15 AM, Karel Piwko <kpiwko at redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Well, we have 3 options where to put tests:
> > >
> > > 1/ Have them tightly integrated - that would be src/test
> > > 2/ Have them next to actual code - that's current proposal
> > > 3/ Have them in separate repository - that's Matthias option
> > >
> > > I chose 2/ because that way people are not required to setup anything
> to
> > >
> >
> > well, it's not really tied to the maven default layout;
> > folks have to explictily cd into the "tests" folder, at root level;
> > Also, I guess you need separated CI hooks for that
> >
> Yes, we need to add one more Maven execution set up in CI.
> >
> >
> >
> > > code on the component while being aware something like integration
> tests
> > > exists and it's not that difficult to fix them if broken by your last
> > > commit.
> > >
> >
> > fair point, but they can be always executed against the latest snapshot.
>
> Yes, they will be no matter where the tests are put into. But "cd tests &
> fix"
> is much less effort compared to check CI job where tests actually are,
> clone,
> fix and rerun.
> >
> >
> >
> > > That's the main reason why I do not like 3/, separate lifecycle for
> tests
> > > adds
> > > entry barrier for test development and maintenance.
> >
> >
> > cd tests (at root level), make this already very similar to a separate
> > project, hence it has
> > an individual "lifecycle", right ?
>
> It is a separate project. But lifecycle is shared.
> >
> >
> >
> > > Option 1/ is the best if
> > > the set of test tools is stable, which is unfortunately not the case
> yet,
> > > unfortunately.
> > >
> >
> > For me, personally src/test is more for unit/mock testing. But that's
> just
> > personal preference.
>
> Right.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Personally, I do not like integration tests being kept separately. With
> > > Arquillian, the boundary between integration and unit test is very
> blur, so
> > > so the only point keeping tests separated is developer turnaround -
> test
> > > execution feedback should be quick. So, if you guys figure out that
> > > integration
> > > tests take too much time in future, I'd opt for making smoke profile
> with a
> > > subset of selected tests and full profile for CI purposes.
> > >
> > > Karel
> > >
> > > On Mon, 20 May 2013 16:30:24 -0300
> > > Bruno Oliveira <bruno at abstractj.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Karel, why do not follow conventions? src/test?
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> http://maven.apache.org/guides/introduction/introduction-to-the-standard-directory-layout.html
> > > >
> > > > Karel Piwko wrote:
> > > > > Hi All,
> > > > >
> > > > > I've just sent a PR for PushEE testing [1]. The idea is to write
> tests
> > > > > covering specification and simply execute those against a real
> running
> > > > > server instance. More details at [2].
> > > > >
> > > > > I have evaluated multiple API approaches, described here[3],
> Groovy and
> > > > > Spock seems to be the best to me.
> > > > >
> > > > > Any comments/suggestions/objections very welcomed. My plan is to
> start
> > > > > covering specs we have so far and run it on a CI server.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > >
> > > > > Karel
> > > > >
> > > > > [1] https://github.com/matzew/pushee/pull/6/
> > > > > [2] https://github.com/kpiwko/pushee/blob/tests/tests/readme.txt
> > > > > [3] https://gist.github.com/kpiwko/5612949
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > 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
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> aerogear-dev mailing list
> aerogear-dev at 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/aerogear-dev/attachments/20130521/dbdf5807/attachment-0001.html