Hi Andras,
On 03.05.2010 21:14, Andras Hatvani wrote:
Hello,
Although I'm not an official committer, but within the scope of a
university course I'm involved in the development and am affected,
too, so I'd like to share my thoughts. (Déjà vu? No, I really re-used
this sentence ;)
>
As I'm always concerned of performance I can only
welcome the separation of unit and integration tests. Since I also
already introduced both plugins and test methods into a large code
base (Simulation of Assembly Workshops @ TU) I have a little
experience and two comments on the current implementation plan:
>
> - I think integration-test would be the matching build phase not only
because of its name, but also due to its pre- and post-phases which
can ease the setup and teardown of the integration tests.
Yes, that's one of the major advantages when starting to use the
maven-failsafe-plugin, in that it guarantees that even when tests fail,
the post-integration phase will be executed and resources can be torn
down (e.g. DB, Jetty, ...).
- Naming conventions are usually highly subjective, so is this with the
suffix, too. However, I think that 'Case' is superfluous and if there
would be a voting I'd vote for *IntegrationTest. I know the class
names would be long, but then they would be consistent with *Test.
*IT would disturb my eyes as I don't like capitals in class names
next to each other. Again, this is highly subjective.
I know. And I am perfectly fine with *IntegrationTest.
Andras
On 2010 May 1, at 19:32, Werner Guttmann wrote:
Hi all,
I have started to introduce the maven-failsafe-plugin to our build.
Please see [1] for a very good and detailed explanation about the
working(s) of this plugin.
The main idea is to have a better and cleaner separation between
a) unit test b) functional (integration) tests.
Right now, most of the modules don't have such a clean separation,
and as such, as part of executing
mvn test
both *unit* and *integration* tests will be executed, increasing
the time of the built during development.
Once this new plugin has been introduced project-wide, and all the
integration tests have been 'marked' as such, the will be a clean
separation at the Maven level:
mvn clean test
... will execute the unit tests only.
mvn clean verify
.. will execute unit and integration tests.
So far, I have introduced the usage of the maven-failsafe-plugin to
the jpa-extensions-it module only, and configured it to use the
*ITCase suffix to establish integration tests. To showcase things,
I have renamed one of the existing functional tests (testing the
support of the JPA @NamedQuery annotation) so far.
Have a look at the project's POM as well, and I'd appreciate any
feedback or questions.
Regards Werner
[1]:
http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-failsafe-plugin/index.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
