[security-dev] Refactoring of picketlink-integration-tests

Ondra Lukas olukas at redhat.com
Mon Jul 1 08:52:32 EDT 2013 

Hi Pedro,
thanks for your answer. Answers to your questions are below.

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Pedro Igor Silva" <psilva at redhat.com>
> To: "Ondra Lukas" <olukas at redhat.com>
> Cc: security-dev at lists.jboss.org
> Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2013 5:27:56 PM
> Subject: Re: [security-dev] Refactoring of picketlink-integration-tests
> 
> Very nice. I have only a few questions for now:
> 
>     - Today we're able to execute a specific group of tests (saml, ws-trust,
>     xacml, etc) for a specific container or all of them. Is this still
>     possible ?
Yes, it should be able to execute tests for specific group. Changes are mainly for EAP 6.1 and newer (EAP 6.0 doesn't work fine, but it will be repaired), but other containers should work as so far (only change in other container was dividing into new packages). However, I look at EAP 5 and it is hybrid between other version and refactored version, so I'm not sure it works fine now, I'll check it and repair it as next part of work on PL refactoring, but it will not be earlier than in second half of July (I'll have some other work to do now and then PTO).

>     - Is there any profile to run arquillian using a remote container ? That
>     would make a lot easier to add and debug things.
I tried it and it works if you add <property name="allowConnectingToRunningServer">true</property> to arquillian.xml (for example in integration-tests/eap-6/src/test/resources/arquillian.xml). I think it's good idea and I add it and set this property as default in next version.

>     - The ServerSetup is only for SecurityDomains or it can be used to any
>     other configuration in standalone.xml ?
It's only for setting SecurityDomain now, but it can be extended to other configuration. Do you have any idea about it? What exactly can be supported?

>     - Is it possible to run the test against a specific PicketLink Version ?
>     Without having to change poms or any config file ?
It isn't possible, but it's good idea! I add it to todo list and try to implement it.

> 
> I would like to start using this new repo for some PicketLink 2.5 tests. That
> way I can give more feedbacks.
> 
> Thanks.
> Pedro Igor
> 
Have a nice day,
Ondra

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ondra Lukas" <olukas at redhat.com>
> To: security-dev at lists.jboss.org
> Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2013 9:25:10 AM
> Subject: Re: [security-dev] Refactoring of picketlink-integration-tests
> 
> Hi,
> I have some progress in refactoring of PicketLink testsuite. Most important
> part for us is EAP 6 and for this reason all changes are connected with
> eap-6 profile meanwhile. It's still working version. Take a look at
> https://github.com/jboss-security-qe/picketlink-integration-tests/tree/pl_refactoring.
> 
> What's new?
> 1) I copied ServerSetup from Wildfly testsuite and modified it for using in
> PicketLink testsuite. It is used for adding security domains instead of XSLT
> in jbas7/eap6 (addSecurityDomain.xslt). Every test which use some security
> domains adds that domains by annotation @ServerSetup({names_of_domains}).
> Security domains are defined in SecurityDomainServerSetupTask - there are
> domains which are currently used by tests and new domain can be added later.
> However ServerSetup is compatible only with EAP 6.1 (there is little
> difference in adding security domain via Management API in EAP 6.0 and EAP
> 6.1), using with EAP 6.0 will be added later.
> 
> 2) Tests are divided into packages according to containers. We have 5 types
> of packages: jbas7, eap6, jbas5, eap5 and common. Every profile runs test in
> some package according to:
> 	- profile jbas7 - runs jbas7 and some includes from commons
> 	- eap6 - eap6, jbas7 and some includes from commons
> 	- jbas5	- jbas5, commons
> 	- eap5 - eap5, jbas5, commons
> 	- jbas6	- commons and some excludes
> 	- tomcat6 - commons and some excludes
> Which tests are actually running is defined in maven-failsafe-plugin in
> integration-tests/CONTAINER/pom.xml.
> 
> 3) Using of Ant file is removed from eap6 profile. Downloading EAP6 is
> provided by maven-download-plugin and copying PicketLink libraries is
> provided by maven-resources-plugin. However it used maven-antrun-plugin for
> unzip container - it's not satisfying but I didn't find any other way how to
> unzip something by maven. Due to copying PicketLink libraries there are
> three new profiles:
> 	- copy-picketlink-from-maven - it is activated by default and it copies
> 	PicketLink from maven.repo.local
> 	- copy-picketlink-from-lib - it copies PicketLink from
> 	jboss.as.picketlink.lib.dir and it work only if jboss.as.picketlink.lib.dir
> 	is set
> 	- skip-copy-picketlink - it doesn't copy anything, original PicketLink from
> 	EAP module is used
> Property picketlink.skip.lib.copy was removed from eap6 profile because it is
> useless now.
> 
> 4) Folder dist was added to integration-tests directory - it's only little
> change, all containers will be located at one place instead of dist folder
> in every container. You can use your own EAP6 distribution if you copy it to
> dist folder and running testsuite with property
> -Deap6-dist-zip=name_of_file_from_dist.zip (and with
> -Deap6-dir-structure=structure if it isn't use default jboss-eap-6.1)
> 
> I want to ask you, is anybody have any idea what can be improved in these
> changes. I'll be happy for every feedback.
> 
> Thanks,
> Ondra
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Anil Saldhana" <Anil.Saldhana at redhat.com>
> > To: security-dev at lists.jboss.org
> > Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2013 4:17:12 PM
> > Subject: Re: [security-dev] Refactoring of picketlink-integration-tests
> > 
> > It should be ok as long as we test against the various versions.
> > 
> > On 05/23/2013 02:10 AM, Ondra Lukas wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > we would like to do some refactoring of PicketLink integration testsuite
> > > for easier QE testing with new versions of EAP. We have some ideas how to
> > > improve it and I want to ask you what do you think about that. Here is
> > > the
> > > list, we would like to:
> > >
> > > 1) change of configuration which running specified tests for specified
> > > container. It is currently set by @TargetContainers annotation. We prefer
> > > to using better usage of maven profiles and for instance Java subpackages
> > > according to profiles. Every subpackage will contain tests which will run
> > > only in that profile (for example org.picketlink.test.trust.tests.eap6
> > > will contain tests for EAP6 profile). Tests which run in every profile
> > > will stay in current packages. Tests which run in more profiles (but not
> > > in all of them) will be added by include/exclude parameters of
> > > maven-failsafe-plugin.
> > >
> > > Why?
> > > It will be easier to configurate it for QE testing. We need some easy way
> > > how to see each test of some profile. Currently we have all tests
> > > together
> > > and it's quite uncomfortable. It will be simpler to add a new container
> > > too.
> > >
> > > 2) avoid use of Ant and try to rewrite it to maven (using Maven Resource
> > > Plugin etc.).
> > >
> > > Why?
> > > We want to have ability of setting properties from command line (which is
> > > not handled correctly by maven-antrun-plugin). Also we want to have only
> > > one type of configuration files.
> > >
> > > 3) create Arquillian's ServerSetupTasks for setting containters (setting
> > > security domains for testing etc.).
> > >
> > > Why?
> > > We want to avoid XSLT because it is sometimes out of work in diffrent
> > > type
> > > of JDKs.
> > >
> > > 4) remove "dist" folders from every container
> > > (/integration-tests/CONTAINER/dist) and remove distributions from dist.
> > > We
> > > will use only one dist folder which will be located in integration-tests
> > > folder.
> > >
> > > Why?
> > > If anybody is cloning picketlink-integration-tests from git, he have to
> > > clone distributions, but it take a lot of unnecessary time. We think that
> > > better way is have one empty folder for all distributions. User can input
> > > nedded distributions.
> > >
> > > What do you think about that? Does anybody have any idea about
> > > improvement
> > > of picketlink-integration-tests testsuite?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Ondrej Lukas
> > _______________________________________________
> > security-dev mailing list
> > security-dev at lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/security-dev
> > 
> _______________________________________________
> security-dev mailing list
> security-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/security-dev
>

More information about the security-dev mailing list