[keycloak-dev] Keycloak - unit tests

Tue Oct 27 16:41:24 EDT 2015

Thanks for your response and an interesting article!

@Stan
Generally I agree with your opinion about Mockacks (people definitely tend
to overuse them and confuse them with Stubs) though I wouldn't "scratch
them off menu" completely because of that.
I find equalization between unit and integration tests rather
controvertial. E.g. It's hard to imagine TDD with tests demanding full
context, new condition of system and hitting the database each time.

In my opinion a well done unit test is characterized by the following:
1. has only one reason to fail;
2. is independent of other tests - so that it may be launched in parallel
with them;
3. last but not least - it's fast - which is critical for TDD!

I love Arquillian from the first sight (I use it to do integration test)
but I would never use it to unit tests. Of course, you're  invited to make
me change my mind. :)

@Stian
"I agree it wouldn't hurt to have unit tests as well, but they are
generally a pain to maintain"
In the subject of problems with maintaining tests I recommend you to listen
to a lecture given by my friend - about tricky things in TDD. It's
available here: https://vimeo.com/120572733

"Mocks make things even worse in that regard."
Come on, don't be obsessed with these Mocks! :P I shouldn't have mentioned
about it… ;)

"Personally I see unit tests and mocks more as a great development tool
than actual quality assurance"
Well, I think that if the unit tests have helped you to write a good
working code than it's just another proof of their reliability… ;)

"End of the day what you care about is that your login page and your rest
services behaves as expected there's just no need for unit tests"
Buisness value. :) Personally, I'm fully satisfied with my work only if the
code I've written is clean and well tested. Furthermore, I prefer clean,
tested but not error-free code than working one, which is embroiled and
unclear.

Best regards,
Andrzej

2015-10-27 15:58 GMT+01:00 Stian Thorgersen <sthorger at redhat.com>:

> Integration tests have many disguises, some are good others are bad. As
> Keycloak is not a framework or set of libraries, but a ready to use service
> it's a lot more important that we test the real thing than test individual
> bits and pieces.
>
> I agree it wouldn't hurt to have unit tests as well, but they are
> generally a pain to maintain. Especially if you want to refactor something.
> Mocks make things even worse in that regard. Personally I see unit tests
> and mocks more as a great development tool than actual quality assurance.
> End of the day what you care about is that your login page and your rest
> services behaves as expected there's just no need for unit tests.
>
> On 27 October 2015 at 04:26, Stan Silvert <ssilvert at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> You should never use mocks again.  I elaborated on this topic in Bill's
>> blog several years ago and he wrote a followup article:
>> http://bill.burkecentral.com/2012/05/01/mocks-are-a-mockery/
>>
>>
>> On 10/27/2015 4:41 AM, Andrzej Goławski wrote:
>>
>> "For example for federation, you need realm and user DB and you need to
>> have realm configured with federation Provider"
>>
>> In such cases you can use mocks, stubs and object factories.
>>
>> "There is not much you can test within single module"
>>
>> IMHO there are still few things which would be nice to test. Look at the
>> first class in the module LDAP Config for example. There are few comments
>> suggesting refactoring it in the feature. I find refactoring single class
>> or classes with heavy integration test painful and insufficient. Look at
>> spring framework code. There are plenty of small unit tests which test only
>> one thing so that it is really well tested as a whole! I think good testing
>> is especially important in case of open source -  where everybody adds some
>> code. For instance me :) For me LDAP it is a new topic, but I would like to
>> add some code to this part ... so I expect to make o a lot of mistakes :D
>> "Btv. what's your plan for KEYCLOAK-1797"
>> And now the hardest  part :) As I said, I'm new in this topic (LDAP) so I
>> decided to wrap my head around it for a while - can you reccommend me any
>> reading materials suitable for beginners?
>>
>> "And in your LDAP environment, is it often that new role is added as
>> member to some other roles?"
>>
>> No .. but it is critical in my company.
>>
>> "I wonder if we need to always do "deep" search in runtime, or if we can
>> instead do it just at some point and rely on Keycloak composite roles . If
>> you always need deep search and do something based on it, it will be good
>> to have a flag in configuration, which will allow to disable it (for
>> performance reasons)."
>>
>> Thank you for the hint :) I couldn't agree more.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>>  Andrzej
>>
>> 2015-10-26 14:11 GMT+01:00 Marek Posolda <mposolda at redhat.com>:
>>
>>> We prefer integration tests as you usually need more things to have
>>> available. For example for federation, you need realm and user DB and you
>>> need to have realm configured with federationProvider. There is not much
>>> you can test within single module, so we have just very simple tests in
>>> individual modules (like LDAPDnTest or PasswordPolicyTest), but most of the
>>> stuff is tested in testsuite. For KEYCLOAK-1797 I prefer to take a look at LDAPRoleMappingsTest
>>> and possibly add new test methods here.
>>>
>>> Btv. what's your plan for KEYCLOAK-1797 ? And in your LDAP environment,
>>> is it often that new role is added as member to some other roles? I wonder
>>> if we need to always do "deep" search in runtime, or if we can instead do
>>> it just at some point and rely on Keycloak composite roles . If you always
>>> need deep search and do something based on it, it will be good to have a
>>> flag in configuration, which will allow to disable it (for performance
>>> reasons).
>>>
>>> Marek
>>>
>>> On 26/10/15 08:55, Andrzej Goławski wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Marek,
>>>
>>> Thanks for reply!
>>> I saw those test, but personally I prefer unit tests over integrated
>>> tests:)
>>> I really recommend this: https://vimeo.com/80533536
>>>
>>> Best Regards,
>>>  Andrzej
>>>
>>> 2015-10-26 8:41 GMT+01:00 Marek Posolda <mposolda at redhat.com>:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> most of the tests are in the testsuite/integration or
>>>> testsuite/integration-arquillian, not in the modules itself. For the
>>>> federation and ldap, you can take a look especially to package
>>>> org.keycloak.testsuite.federation .
>>>>
>>>> Marek
>>>>
>>>> On 25/10/15 21:51, Andrzej Goławski wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi everyone!
>>>>
>>>> I decided to implement KEYCLOAK-1797 and started to look at the code
>>>> (federation/ldap). I noticed lack of unit tests without which refactoring
>>>> may be very error prone. I like writing test so I can write tests for that
>>>> part. What are you thinking about it??
>>>>
>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>  Andrzej
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> keycloak-dev mailing listkeycloak-dev at lists.jboss.orghttps://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> keycloak-dev mailing listkeycloak-dev at lists.jboss.orghttps://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> keycloak-dev mailing list
>> keycloak-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> keycloak-dev mailing list
> keycloak-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/keycloak-dev/attachments/20151027/46d7108d/attachment.html 