Latka looks like a great tool for driving testing from HTTP test clients. However, my test requirements are to run in container - doing API level testing of EJB's. Therefore, Latka is not a good solution. I like everything cactus does, except I want to use the dynamic proxy version of junit.jar to allow parameterization to the junit testXXX methods. Guess I'll have to find out empirically. Will let you know!! ;-)
Cheers, Bill ----- Original Message ----- From: "Erik Hatcher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Cactus Users List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 11:08 PM Subject: Re: Cactus as functional test tool > How about Latka instead? > > http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/latka/index.html > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bill Laird" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Cactus Users List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 2:32 PM > Subject: Cactus as functional test tool > > > > Hello - what are your thoughts on using Cactus as a functional test tool? > > I'm thinking about using cactus as a functional test tool. To accomplish > > this task, I need Junit tests that accept arguements. To accomplish this, > I > > am thinking of using the Junit featuring dynamic extensions. (see > > http://www.gnufoo.org/junit/index.html ) . I'm wondering if the dynamic > > extension mechanism will work with the cactus architecture. > > > > Thoughts? > > > > THanks, > > Bill Laird > > > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > For additional commands, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
