Are there any objections to adding EasyMock and PowerMock as the mocking frameworks?
If not, in the next couple days I would like to integrate that change with ACCUMULO-53 (or I can open up a new ticket if people prefer). Thanks! --Jesse ------------------- Jesse Yates 240-888-2200 @jesse_yates On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 12:24 PM, Jesse Yates <[email protected]>wrote: > Sorry for the divergent messages - couldnt find a good way to combine them. > > > On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 11:54 AM, Keith Turner <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 11:19 AM, John W Vines <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > >> > > 3. What I want to see us doing, at a very high level, is to have the >> ability to mock an entire TServer to the extent where we will use something >> to replace Zookeeper (We should probably turn our ZK work with an >> interface) with a MockZookeeper (not generated through a Mock util) which >> is nothing more than a Map. Same thing with the FileReader, except a >> SortedMap, the loggers, and the master. This way we could fully implement a >> whole TServer without worry about HDFS and Zookeeper. >> > To a similar extent I would like to see this done for all core components, >> but mocking the various connectors we use to get done what we need to. I >> see a few sets of Mock class we will have to create. But with less chance >> of divergence in behavior then we currently experience with our >> MockAccumulo setup. >> > >> This sounds like a good goal. Seems like in addition to mocking, we >> would need to refactor code to support dependency injection. >> > > With PowerMock we can avoid having to refactor everything since we can > catch object creation and return your own mock object. Dependency injection > then becomes a moot need unless we start using a configuration framework > for launching different elements. > > > -- > ------------------- > Jesse Yates > 240-888-2200 > @jesse_yates > >
