--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I'm not so sure I like the idea of using jars for > testing without > declaring them as a dependency.
I don't think of it as a dependency, it's essentially just declaring multiple source trees for the test classes, and some of those test classes happen to have a Jelly tag interface. It's not an elegant approach, but it does allow bean, junit, log, etc. tags to be released independently of the core, which I think is a good goal. Theoretically, do you think that an approach like this can be reflected in the generated Ant script? Even if not, it may be worth an extra manual step to creating Ant scripts if no better way presents itself. > I'd be happier if we could change the tests to not > rely on them. I'd be fine with that if it didn't affect the effectiveness of the tests. If we end up with equally good, non-convoluted tests, +1. > I'm currently working on removing the bean code from > the core tests. It's > tedious and error prone, but worthwhile AFAIK. I was wondering what was going on there. :) Cool. Even if we did end up including tags like junit in the unit tests, I'd prefer core to be completely decoupled from bean. > If the core couldn't use the test and log taglibs I > wouldn't be averse to > rewriting the existing tests to stop using them. It's inconvenient, but I think it's important that junit tags have a separate release cycle. We can achieve this by including the junit tag classes with the test classes or by removing the junit tags in the core unit tests. I'm fine with either, whatever works out the best for us. There may be better approaches too; I'm open to suggestions. - Morgan > -- > dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting > Blog: > http://www.freeroller.net/page/dion/Weblog > Work: http://www.multitask.com.au > > > Morgan Delagrange <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on > 15/01/2003 08:19:12 AM: > > > Hey all, > > > > So I can't see an obvious way to do it in > project.xml, > > but I can write a preGoal in maven.xml that will > allow > > the core build to use non-core tags for unit > tests. > > E.g. this is what you would need to do if we > removed > > the "bean" classes from the core: > > > > <preGoal name="test:compile"> > > > > <mkdir dir="target/test-source"/> > > > > <copy todir="target/test-source"> > > <!-- core unit test classes --> > > <fileset dir="src/test"/> > > > > <!-- > core unit tests rely on both the bean > > > taglib and classes in the bean taglib's > unit tests > --> > > <fileset dir="jelly-tags/bean/src/test"> > > <exclude name="**/Test*.java"/> > > </fileset> > > <fileset dir="jelly-tags/bean/src/java"/> > > </copy> > > > > </preGoal> > > > > And then, of course, the "unitTestSourceDirectory" > in > > project.xml becomes "target/test-source". Works > > great, but unfortunately it doesn't allow for > > automatic generation of the ant script. Does > anyone > > know of a way to create a similar result while > > preserving ant script generation? > > > > - Morgan > > > > ===== > > Morgan Delagrange > > http://jakarta.apache.org/taglibs > > http://jakarta.apache.org/commons > > http://axion.tigris.org > > http://jakarta.apache.org/watchdog > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Do you Yahoo!? > > Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up > now. > > http://mailplus.yahoo.com > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > For additional commands, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > ForwardSourceID:NT000A2D6E > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > ===== Morgan Delagrange http://jakarta.apache.org/taglibs http://jakarta.apache.org/commons http://axion.tigris.org http://jakarta.apache.org/watchdog __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
