[jboss-jira] [JBoss JIRA] (WFLY-596) TS: Pick the most acceptable test packages organization

Tue Apr 23 15:45:01 EDT 2013

     [ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFLY-596?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

Jason Greene moved AS7-2104 to WFLY-596:
----------------------------------------

        Project: WildFly  (was: Application Server 7)
            Key: WFLY-596  (was: AS7-2104)
    Component/s:     (was: Test Suite)

    
> TS: Pick the most acceptable test packages organization
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: WFLY-596
>                 URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFLY-596
>             Project: WildFly
>          Issue Type: Sub-task
>            Reporter: Ondrej Zizka
>            Assignee: Ondrej Zizka
>
> 1) Split classes to src/main and src/test ?
> This seems to be decided before - integration tests suite has all classes in src/test.
> {quote}
> (02:35:15) barreiro: When I start I done it that way so that it clear to me what was the test code, the test subject and the resources --- I knew that probably I would have to change the location later.
> {quote}
> 2) Low-level Test packages micro
> {quote}
> (02:37:51) barreiro: should I create one sub package for each test --- like /web/xxxTestCase --- or stick with the old schema of having web/tests and web/servlets, ... etc.
> (02:38:01) ozizka: Not sure if democracy is the principle to follow here, but I'd like devs to agree upon these things. TBD next week
> (02:38:41) ozizka: Depends if you reuse them.
> (02:39:24) ozizka: But generally, I'd prefer the first approach -
> (02:39:53) ozizka: with reused things being placed one level higher, or next to
> (02:40:16) ozizka: The structure should reflect test's structure
> (02:40:24) barreiro: IMO, democracy is not the way to go in a OSS project :P ... I'll do it the way you ask me to ;)
> (02:40:34) ozizka: Ok :)
> (02:40:57) ozizka: But anyway - what's your preference?
> (02:41:07) ozizka: Or what would suite better for _your_ case
> (02:42:42) barreiro: the ultimate goal is that someone from outside can easily understand what's going on. Like me, I just landed in this project. :P
> (02:43:58) barreiro: surely that it should reflect the test's structure. but I would rather have a common structure in most modules ... 
> (02:45:30) barreiro: like, at some level there is a clear list of the tests in the package that is not mixed with other stuff --- be it a list of packages or a test package with all the test classes  
> (02:45:43) ozizka: Well, 1st option is current practice, I'd stick with that.
> (02:46:47) barreiro: and from there should be clear (as possible) what resources are used.
> (02:47:34) ozizka: I was thinking about using a mechanism used in Wicket framework, if you know that,
> (02:47:57) ozizka: which is, having a mechanism to load resources from places
> (02:48:04) barreiro: After a while I start to understand how AS6 is structured ... the problem is that there is too much voodoo in the back that defeats it's purpose.
> (02:48:18) ozizka: where the test class is loaded, or it's superclass, etc.
> (02:48:45) ozizka: Eventually it could go by packages up. But perhaps too magical for a testsuite
> (02:49:10) ozizka: Right. That's the voodoo.
> (02:56:27) barreiro: yep. Shrinkwrap and arquilling are great for that. The magic is greatly reduced, without adding much complexity. 
> (02:58:10) ozizka: One other argument to have the package-per-test separation is that if we decided the other way, moving the files would be easier
> {quote}

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira