My vote is for begin() and end() methods since setUp() and tearDown() methods originate from the JUnit framework, and begin() and end() is specific to Cactus and execute on the client.
Charley -----Original Message----- From: Patrick Lightbody [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2002 3:11 AM To: Cactus Users List Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename clientSetUp() and clientTearDown() in 1.5dev Personally I think clientSetUp and clientTearDown make more sense, assuming they work just like setUp and tearDown (once per test). -Pat ----- Original Message ----- From: "Vincent Massol" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "'Cactus Users List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2002 10:56 AM Subject: [VOTE] Rename clientSetUp() and clientTearDown() in 1.5dev > Hi, > > Charles Massey has proposed on the 15th of July another name for the > clientSetUp() and clientTearDown() methods : begin() and end(). > > I think it is a better name than what we have and I propose to make the > change to begin() and end(). It is more logical as we already have > beginXXX() and endXXX() methods. > > What do you think ? > > Here is my +1 > > Thanks > -Vincent > > > -- > 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]>
