Hi Vincent As I said switching to Cactus and contributing definitely seems like a good alternative. However as I was reading in on your browser intergration it seems like our web interface is a little bit more advanced. On the other hand its the only integration we got :)
In our framework you can browse your tests and run induvidual tests or whole suites. There is also possible to run all test suites for an entire package. As far as I could see this is not possible in Cactus(?), is this something you planning on adding? Furthermore we have a feature where you can choose to execute only the setup and the actual test but not the teardown. This is very useful when developing database code. When a test fails you often want to see what the test data looks like. Does this feature exist in Cactus? Do your think it is possible (or even a good idea) to add it? My problem is that I have a very hard time motivating a switch to Cactus if some of our current features disappears. /Magnus -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- Fr�n: Vincent Massol [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Skickat: den 31 januari 2005 20:50 Till: 'Cactus Users List' �mne: RE: JNDI-lookup of local EJB:s on Oracle appserver Hi Magnus, > -----Original Message----- > From: Magnus Grimsell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: lundi 31 janvier 2005 18:12 > To: [email protected] > Subject: JNDI-lookup of local EJB:s on Oracle appserver > > Hi > > I am using an inhouse developed framework for running serverside junit > tests. The framework is built upon JUnitEE and have worked rather well for > us in the past. However we are currently porting one of our applications > to Oracle Application Server 10g, and here we run into trouble. The > problem is that in Oracle, local ejbs cannot be looked up in the global > jndi context. You must map the ejb via an ejb-ref in your web.xml (or ejb- > jar.xml). > > I was thinking of extending our framework so that the web.xml of the > testrunner application would be generated with mappings to all local ejbs > of the current ear. Is this something that is already implemented in > Cactus. No, this is a piece that is missing in Cactus. We have a <cactifywar> Ant task but we're missing a <cactifyear> one that would cactify an existing EAR and possibly do some fancy things like adding EJB mappings. > > When looking into Cactus I realized that its got some feature that I > really want, like Ant/Eclipse integration, so switching to Cactus might be > a good idea anyhow. It seems like a better idea to put the effort to make > this work into a good open source project rather then into our existing > framework. I completely agree with this approach :-) Here's the best way of contributing: 1/ You create a JIRA issue for this 2/ You use the Cactus-dev mailing list to discuss. You may have questions and we can help you understand the cactus code base, etc. 3/ Once you have a patch against CVS HEAD ready you attach it to the above-mentioned JIRA issue 4/ One Cactus committer applies it Thanks a lot -Vincent --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
