I don't see why we can't copy the .eba to the load directory of target during the pax based tests.
On 22 September 2010 03:31, Timothy Ward <[email protected]> wrote: > > I really think that we need to run the assemblies as part of our testing > every build. > > We can use embedded ant to launch the assembly, and to copy the EBA into the > load directory, then to launch some standard JUnits that ping the servlets to > see if they're awake. This will give us a much more reliable mechanism to > show that the assemblies work. > > Tim > > ---------------------------------------- >> Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2010 10:46:29 +0100 >> From: [email protected] >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: blog and aries trader assembly >> >> Hi >> >> The assembly projects assemble the OSGi platform needed to run samples. >> The only way to be _completely_ certain that the assembly hasn't been >> broken is to is to run the sample. We introduced i-tests for Aries >> Trader and the Blog Sample that mimic the behaviour of the assembly >> projects, and these give a good indication of when an assembly is likely >> to have been broken. So the first rule is that if you have to change a >> sample i-test you almost certainly have to change the assembly project. >> >> The place where the assembly differs from the i-test is that, to run an >> eba on the platform which has been assembled, you have to copy the eba >> into a load directory. This exact process is not replicated in the >> i-tests so anyone making changes to application, and in particular, the >> code which installs applications really should (currently) manually run >> the blog sample :-) >> >> I think we might be able to do some more sophisticated testing, but I'm >> not sure how. The other option is for developers to periodically run the >> blog sample. Of course, there are other samples (hello world) which >> don't have i-tests and are probably broken too. >> >> More generally - there seems to have been some significant re-factoring >> 'Application', thinking ahead to the next release - could someone >> summarise the changes? >> >> Zoë >> >> >>> I am just wondering how to remind people (especially new joiners) to >>> maintain the assembly code as the full assembly process is not part of >>> build. Is it too much to make it part of build? Any thoughts? >>> >>> Regards >>> Emily >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Unless stated otherwise above: >>> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number >>> 741598. >>> Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> > -- Alasdair Nottingham [email protected]
